THE SCIENCE OF

SMALL ARMS BALLISTICS

 THE SCIENCE OF
SMALL ARMS BALLISTICS

Alvah Buckmore, Jr.

Ballistician & Theoretician
Apple Academic Press Inc. Apple Academic Press Inc.
3333 Mistwell Crescent 9 Spinnaker Way
Oakville, ON L6L 0A2 Waretown, NJ 08758
Canada USA

© 2019 by Apple Academic Press, Inc.

Exclusive worldwide distribution by CRC Press, a member of Taylor & Francis Group
No claim to original U.S. Government works
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-1-77188-650-5 (Hardcover)
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-1-315-14720-8 (eBook)
All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any
electric, mechanical or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and re-
cording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publish-
er or its distributor, except in the case of brief excerpts or quotations for use in reviews or critical articles.
This book contains information obtained from authentic and highly regarded sources. Reprinted material
is quoted with permission and sources are indicated. Copyright for individual articles remains with the
authors as indicated. A wide variety of references are listed. Reasonable efforts have been made to publish
reliable data and information, but the authors, editors, and the publisher cannot assume responsibility for
the validity of all materials or the consequences of their use. The authors, editors, and the publisher have
attempted to trace the copyright holders of all material reproduced in this publication and apologize to
copyright holders if permission to publish in this form has not been obtained. If any copyright material
has not been acknowledged, please write and let us know so we may rectify in any future reprint.
Trademark Notice: Registered trademark of products or corporate names are used only for explanation
and identification without intent to infringe.

Library and Archives Canada Cataloguing in Publication

Buckmore, Alvah, Jr., author

The science of small arms ballistics : both for the academia and the
recreational shooting community / Alvah Buckmore, Jr., ballistician &
theoretician.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
Issued in print and electronic formats.
ISBN 978-1-77188-650-5 (hardcover).--ISBN 978-1-315-14720-8 (PDF)
1. Ballistics. 2. Firearms. I. Title.

UF820.B83 2018 531’.55 C2018-903197-2 C2018-903198-0

CIP data on file with US Library of Congress

Apple Academic Press also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears
in print may not be available in electronic format. For information about Apple Academic Press products,
visit our website at www.appleacademicpress.com and the CRC Press website at www.crcpress.com
I dedicate this book to my wife,
Lolita Buckmore
CONTENTS

About the Author ......................................................................................... ix

List of Abbreviations ................................................................................... xi
List of Symbols .......................................................................................... xiii
Preface ........................................................................................................xv
Introduction to the Science of Small Arms Ballistics ................................ xix

SECTION ONE ................................................................................................... 1

1. The Science of Interior Ballistics .............................................................. 3
2. A Practical Application to Scientific Experimentation ......................... 25
3. A Theory of the Asymptotic Function .................................................... 45
4. The Theory of Twist ................................................................................. 55
5. The Theory of Bullet Spin ....................................................................... 57
6. The Theory of Kinetic Energy ................................................................ 59
7. Temperature Conversion Formulas........................................................ 67
8. Bullet Geometry ....................................................................................... 69
9. Statistics .................................................................................................... 73

SECTION TWO ................................................................................................ 79

10. The Science of Exterior Ballistics ........................................................... 81
11. The Field-Effect Theory .......................................................................... 83
12. A Theory of the Effect of Field-Effect Over Time ................................. 91
13. A Theory of the Effect of Gravity over Time ......................................... 99
14. A Theory of the Effect of Field-Effect Over Trajectory...................... 103
15. Theory, Application, and Calculation of Trajectory in Real-Time..... 107
16. Wind Deflection ...................................................................................... 121
17. Air Density in Real-Time........................................................................ 123
viii Contents

18. The Speed of Sound in Air ..................................................................... 127

19. Approximate Time of Flight .................................................................. 129
20. Maximum Range of Lethality ............................................................... 131
21. Maximum Effective Range .................................................................... 137
22. The Correlis Effect ................................................................................. 143
23. True Minute of Angle ............................................................................. 147

SECTION THREE.......................................................................................... 149

24. The Science of Terminal Ballistics ........................................................ 151
25. Transfer of Energy ................................................................................. 153
26. Temperature of Transfer of Energy ...................................................... 157
27. Reflection of Kinetic Energy ................................................................. 161
28. Acceptance of Kinetic Energy ............................................................... 163
29. Theory of Penetration ............................................................................ 165
30. Calculating the Expectant Depth of Penetration into Animal Issue....177
31. Ballistic Reflection Coefficient .............................................................. 185
32. Ballistic Reflection Power ...................................................................... 187
33. Ballistic Penetrating Power ................................................................... 189
34. Ballistic Work Function ......................................................................... 191
Bibliography............................................................................................. 193
Index ......................................................................................................... 195
ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Alvah Buckmore, Jr.

US Army Veteran, Small Arms Ballistics Expert

Alvah Buckmore, Jr., was a United States Army

veteran during the time of the Vietnam War. When
he came home to his parents in late 1974, after get-
ting hurt very badly, he urinated with blood thick
as tomato juice and weighed only 108 pounds. The
Veterans Administration immediately took steps to
nurse him back to health as an outpatient patient,
and within four years, he had fully recovered from
the weight loss and several infections. As part of his
method of recovery, he went on a program of hunting, fishing, hiking,
mountain climbing, target practice, reloading ammunition, and worked on
a systematic study of the science of small arms ballistics.
He is a self-taught genuine expert on small arms ballistics with national
and international recognition as a pioneer on this subject. He taught him-
self advanced mathematics and developed the skills and tools to work out
the mathematical relationships of physical phenomena, starting off with
the Theory of Transfer of Energy, Theory of Penetration, Field-Effect,
and the Effect of Field-Effect Over Trajectory and Time. Among several
other new theories in interior, exterior and terminal ballistics, he finally
had enough material to write out an entirely original book on the science
of small arms ballistics, working over a period of more than 20 years. He
has also written and published on electronic radio communications and
human sexuality.
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

APFSDS armor-piercing fin-stabilized discarding sabot

BBL best bullet length
BMV best muzzle velocity
BPP ballistic penetrating power
BRC ballistic reflection coefficient
BRP ballistic reflection power
BTU British thermal units
CP correct powder
ES extreme spread
FN flat-nose
GSW gunshot wound
KE kinetic energy
MKS meter-kilogram-second system
MV muzzle velocity
RCC remaining case capacity
RE reflection of energy
RN round-nose
SD standard deviation
SP spitzer point
SPBT spitzer point boat-tail
SVAT soil-vegetation-atmosphere-transfer
SWC semi-wad cutter
TE transfer of energy
TOF time of flight
UBP uncorrected barometric pressure
WC wad cutter
LIST OF SYMBOLS

Bd bullet diameter
Bp bullet density
P density
V velocity
MV muzzle velocity
TE transfer of energy
σ air density
Æ asymptotic function
Temp. temperature
Þ work function
g acceleration due to gravity
ŵ bullet spin
Ţ terminal velocity
ƺ initial terminal velocity
@ public domain
RCC remaining case capacity
© copyright
Lo low
Hi high
Av average
ES extreme spread
Sd standard deviation
SD sectional density
MER maximum effective range
MRL maximum range of lethality
MED maximum effective distance
TW twist
Bl bullet length
d diameter
BBL best bullet length
xiv List of Symbols

BMV best muzzle velocity

KE kinetic energy
E energy
D distance
PREFACE

This book has the explicit purpose of serving as a manual for both mem-
bers of academia and members of the recreational shooting community
throughout the world. Though it contains extensive mathematical formu-
las (58 of them) in the English unit of measurement on the most part, the
purpose of the book is not to intimidate anyone, regardless of his educa-
tional background, but to demonstrate the relationships between the physi-
cal variables and their real-world engineering applications. The formulas
also have the explicit purpose to allow serious hunters and recreational
and competitive shooters to reload ammunition with much greater preci-
sion and with much, much less guesswork.
Still a cursory examination of both the title and the table of contents,
by anyone even remotely familiar with its literature will readily single out
this book as very different from anything else on the market, either now
or in the past. With very few exceptions, every book on the science of bal-
listics has been either confined to a tiny proportion of this subject, or it has
been unreadable mathematically, with intensive gobbledygook written by
someone with an advanced education on the science of mathematics, but
who never took the time to communicate in the written word.
Even unclassified scientific material by government scientists on
the science of ballistics is exceedingly difficult to read. We can find this
material using any of the several search engines readily available on the
internet.
Nor is it meant to be an intellectual abstraction of the science of small
arms ballistics. Every word has an explicit purpose meant to be readable
for the average person with an interest and desire to read and understand
small arm ballistics with the purpose of developing a more solid grasp of
this important but underappreciated science.
This book will define the science of ballistics, break it down into
its major and logical categories and then explain the basic patterns and
relationships in a way that, hopefully, the reader can understand and use
xvi Preface

toward the solution of his problems, either to design ammunition for a

particular gun or a gun for any particular ammunition.
At each successive step, from interior to exterior to terminal ballistics,
we will describe the major relationships that make up the science of small
arms ballistics, including areas well outside of the science of ballistics. We
will describe these relationships mathematically using standard systems of
mathematical communications recognizable to the scientific community.
In some instances, we will introduce new symbols and, in many instances,
entirely new concepts, relationships, equations and even a demonstration
of the potential for the development of new sciences, technologies and
industries evolving from concepts and relationships in the science of small
arms ballistics.
They will include the inception of the scientific study of time, evolving
from the study of the field-effect theory in exterior ballistics, a recognition
we may some day learn to manipulate space and time with the correspond-
ing capability to travel through time from present to present and present
to the future or past.
Though not an issue brought up in this book, it has become increasingly
obvious to the perceptive person over the last century that we occasionally
find visitors from other worlds, visiting us out of scientific curiosity, using a
huge variety of advanced and very different if not entirely unique scientific
technologies that we can easily perceive but is over our heads, including
visitors from our own kind, from our own distant future, using time-travel
as their mode of transportation. It has also grown increasingly obvious,
as we study the cause and effect relationships in the science of exterior
ballistics that some of these relationships can lead to the development of
time-travel for us.
When we examine this subject in greater detail, it becomes just as obvi-
ous that this electrostatically charged plasma in outer space everywhere
throughout the universe may have a memory attributed to it; meaning, it
may be possible to use this plasma to store data in the same way we store
data on a computer hard drive and, with this electrostatic charge, to expe-
dite the movement of data flow.
Nor can we exclude the development of ballistic signatures, a way to
identify the caliber, velocity and mass of a projectile in real-time flight, or
to calculate trajectory backwards in order to identify a sniper’s position.
Preface xvii

There is even room to develop a science of force-fields, evolving from

the science of small arms ballistics, a science to absorb, reflect, or project
kinetic energy as either a defensive or offensive weapon system.
Each equation, which describes a mathematical relationship, such as
transfer of energy, will have an engineering application for the shooter
with a design problem. Some equations, such as the calculation of bullet
length with a given muzzle velocity and rate of twist, represent manipula-
tions of those equations, such as the rate of twist and bullet spin. Some
other equations represent a set of mathematical instructions to resolve a
technical problem, such as the computation of trajectory or depth of pen-
etration of living tissue in real-time.
Ballistics is a much bigger subject with a genuine need for much more
thought and technical development than presently recognized by aca-
demia, recreational shooters, law enforcement, or the armed forces. It has
the inherent potential to lead to the development of dozens of entirely new
sciences, technologies, and vast industries most of us cannot even perceive
at the moment.
—Alvah Buckmore, Jr.
INTRODUCTION TO THE SCIENCE
OF SMALL ARMS BALLISTICS

A PREPARATORY HISTORY OF EARLY PHYSICS BEFORE WE GET

INTO THE SCIENCE OF BALLISTICS

EARTH

Our Earth rotates on its own axis, in a clockwise position from west to
east and hence the reason our Sun rises from the east and travels west.
However, if we were in Outer Space a million miles or so from the planet
Earth and looking straight down at it from the North Pole, it would look as
if the Earth were rotating counter-clockwise from east to west. The axis of
the Earth intersects in its surface at both the North and South Poles, with
the Earth rotating around it once in every 24 hours around the Sun and, in

Photograph of Earth, taken during the Apollo 17 Lunar Mission in 1972. – Wikipedia, the
free encyclopedia.
xx The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

respect to the stars, once every 23 hours, 56 minutes and 4 seconds, but
gradually slowing down due to the tidal effects of the Moon.
In the last 100 years, our Atomic clocks clearly show our Earth’s days
are longer by nearly 1.7 milliseconds and will get longer and longer every
year until the end of our own Universe.

BRIEF HISTORY OF ITS SCIENTIFIC STUDY

Early man’s attempts to scientifically study this subject was slow and
exceedingly difficult, full of inconsistencies, extensive plagiarisms and
frauds, and intimidations and contradictions in the interpretation of
research data. He had to cope with the enormous complexity of looking
at something very big, while very small, and without the proper support,
material resources or technical instrumentation, such as a telescope. He
also had to deal with the adverse intimidating side-effects of religion and
culture over an interpretation of the available research information when
it contradicted conventional intuitive wisdom or a belief system at the
time.
Both religion and culture have always had the power to modulate man’s
interpretation of anything with the corresponding power to coerce him to
seek a “confirmation” of the pre-dominate bias at the time. Objectivity was
not only very difficult, in the best of times, but downright impossible and
even dangerous to life and limb, such as when fighting the coercive pow-
ers of a powerful pagan religion, the Roman Catholic Church in medieval
Europe or Nazi Germany in the 20th century. It takes more than intellect
and integrity to be objective; sometimes it takes enormous courage, such
as with Galileo (1564–1642) in his study of the astronomical observations
and support for heliocentrism by Copernicus (1473–1543).
We will also see that when we study the various ancient Greeks in
the Pythagorean School [note: Pythagorean means of or pertaining to the
ancient Ionian mathematician, philosopher, and music theorist Pythag-
oras (c. 570–c. 495 BCE) – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia], who
believed the Earth rotated on its axis and around the Sun instead of the
Universe (the Heavens) rotating around the Earth, they held a clear and
direct contradiction to the opinions and conclusions of other, sometimes
Introduction to the Science of Small Arms Ballistics xxi

more politically or ecclesiastically correct, people much later, particularly

when in contradiction to the Holy Bible and their scriptures
What we will find, in this history of the study of Earth’s rotation and
its relevance to the science of ballistics is the remarkable conclusion that,
although these studies originated more than 2,500 years ago, there is still
controversy and much more to learn about our planet.
More remarkable is the similarity between today’s controversies of
scientific research and development to those in more ancient times, par-
ticularly in certain areas of human endeavor. In that respect, nothing has
changed!
Perhaps the first person in human history to have hypothesized the
Earth rotates around its axis and around the Sun was Philolaus (470–385
BCE); but, according to August Bockh (1785–1867), Philolaus was the
successor of Pythagoras, perhaps not the originator of this theory. We may
never know for sure.
However, Philolaus’s system of analysis and proof was difficult to
follow with his “counter-earth rotating daily in the region of a ‘Central
Fire.’” He did away with the attitude of a fixed direction in space and

Bust of Pythagoras of Samos in the Capitoline Museums, Rome.

(Source: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kapitolinischer_Pythagoras.jpg
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0)
xxii The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

Philolaus, the successor of Pythagoras, and perhaps not responsible for the original
theory. According to Stobaeus, his theory was not that the earth revolved around the sun
(Heliocentrism), but that it revolved around a hypothetical astronomical object he called
the “Central Fire,” around which the sun also revolved around it.
Introduction to the Science of Small Arms Ballistics xxiii

instead developed one of the first non-geocentric views of the universe.

He believed the Earth, Moon, Sun and other planets revolved around a
hypothetical astronomical object he described as an unseen “Central Fire.
Perhaps, with his notion there is a “fire in the middle” of the Universe,
he may have been thinking of the Sun as the Central Fire in the cen-
ter of the Universe, though other accounts say otherwise (which may or
may not be the results of confusion by Joannes Stobaeus, 5th-century CE
from Stobi in Macedonia, who compiled a valuable series of extracts from
Greek authors?)
Aristarchus of Samos (c. 310 – c. 230 BCE), an ancient Greek astrono-
mer and mathematician, presented the first known model placing the Sun
at the center of the known universe with the Earth revolving around it.
Though influenced by Philolaus, he identified the “Central Fire” as the Sun,
and put the other planets in their correct order of distance around the Sun.
When we look at the Earth from their vantage positions, looking at it
without a telescope or any other instrument, or any prior real knowledge
from earlier thinkers, we can easily recognize Philolaus’s system as mak-
ing a lot of sense, as well as with Aristarchus’s perception.
Another controversy, supported by a variety of thinkers, such as Hice-
tas (400–335 BCE), Ponticus Heraclides (390–310 BCE) and Ecphantus
(who may not have existed), accepted the notion or theory that the Earth
rotates around its axis but not necessarily around the Sun.
Aristotle (384–322 BCE) was critical of Philolaus’s ideas. He held
the theory a sphere of stationary stars rotated around the Earth, a theory
accepted by most people who followed him for centuries. Claudius Ptol-
emy (100–170 CE), as an example, believed, that if the Earth were rotat-
ing, as many people also thought at his time, then everything on it would
violently fly off into space. That made sense without our knowledge of
Gravity, a knowledge that came much later with the help by Galileo and
Newton. Although Aristotle was clearly mistaken in his belief, it is equally
clear he was conscientious in his efforts to teach himself, as well as his stu-
dents, such as Alexander the Great, to learn to clearly and logically think,
talk and to use information properly. In that respect, he was quite success-
ful, definitely brilliant and immersed with the culture of war, conquest,
slavery and subordination of people as an integral part of an economic
system common in his days.
xxiv The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

Aryabhata (476–550 CE) was an Indian astronomer who wrote in 499

CE that the Earth was round and rotated on its axis every day, and the
movement of the stars was due to Earth’s rotation. He used an analogy:
“Just as a man in a boat going in one direction sees the stationary things
on the bank as moving in the opposite direction, in the same way to a man
at Lanka the fixed stars appear to be going westward.”
Some Muslim astronomers in the 10th century accepted the theory of
Earth rotating around its axis and Abu Sa’id Ahmed ibn Mohammed ibn
Abd al-Jalil al-Sijzi (c. 945–c. 1020 CE) held the notion “that the motion
we see is due to the Earth’s movement and not to that of the sky…” About
that time, people who followed him also recognized “… the earth is in
constant circular motion, and what appears to be the motion of the heav-
ens (our Solar System) is actually due to motion of the earth and not
stars.” Nevertheless, for centuries after Philolaus, there were people who
agreed and disagreed with him, including at least a dozen or more trea-
tises written by them discussing the subject either accepting or rejecting
Ptolemy’s argument that, if the Earth were rotating, instead of the whole
Universe rotating around the Earth (or the Heavens, as they understood it),
everything on the planet would fly off in an enormous storm (or as gales,
as they logically looked at it). All of this made sense, of course, when we
lack knowledge of Gravity. Gravity kept everything from flying off, we
eventually learned, thanks to Galileo and Newton.
Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274 CE), living in medieval Europe (between
the 5th and the 15th centuries) at the time, accepted Aristotle’s view on the
subject “… that of a sphere of stationary stars rotated around the Earth
…,” as well as scores of scholars, astronomers and philosophers, and not
until did Nicolaus Copernicus (1473–1543) firmly establish the heliocen-
tric world system, did the whole scientific community finally come around
to accept the view that Earth rotates around the Sun instead of the whole
Universe rotating around the Earth.
It took a long, long time, nearly 1,800 years in fact, for us to finally
accept the Earth rotates around its axis and around the Sun and, now, with
that basic knowledge, we can begin the study working toward the develop-
ment of a real science of ballistics. Even then there was still controversy
for another 100 years; or so.
Introduction to the Science of Small Arms Ballistics xxv

We must realize it was very difficult for ancient man to study his world.
Until fairly recently, man on the most part lived in acute poverty, health,
nutrition and medical deprivation, and with an intense ignorance of the
world around him. For thousands of years, he literally lived in a cave in the
side of a mountain, a hole in the wall of a shelter, perhaps underground or
some other primitive above-ground structure, and always without running
water, heat or a means to keep himself clean or with an enough food to stay
comfortable and healthy. Life was short!.
Everything was a mystery for him! Even a simple analysis or discov-
ery of some physical or psychological phenomena took time to develop;
sometimes, it took centuries for him to generalize from his observations
and experiences to record them for the next generation. Though he cer-
tainly had the brain-power, it was not enough without an accumulation
of real, verifiable knowledge, precisely the kind of verifiable knowl-
edge that took literally hundreds – and indeed sometimes – thousands
of years to accumulate along with the constant struggle of survival he
faced every day.
Then, there was a constant challenge of his developing a suitable tech-
nology to record his growing accumulation of knowledge for the people
who followed him. None of this was easy! And it is obvious now he had
to learn and re-learn the same things over and over for thousands of years
before it finally entered into a record for the next generation of thinkers.
He needed to assess and assimilate what earlier man learned into more
useful, verifiable knowledge and, at long last, a real, useful, usable and
meaningful database for engineering applications and a better way to live.
Nor can we discount the thousands of years of dangerous ideologies, reli-
gions, cults, pseudosciences, political power games of tyranny, slavery as
an integral part of an economy, genuine conspiracies to obstruct intellec-
tual development and even motivations out of jealousy.
We can go as recently as the Spanish Inquisition, Nazi Germany, the
Stalinist Soviet Union or, as I write out this Chapter, the Taliban and
insurgents in the Middle East who have destroyed the lives of millions of
people out of religious intolerance and a quest for absolute power without
responsibility.
There is an Islamic movement called the “Worldwide Caliphate”
with the ultimate intent to “conquer the West” with a single theocratic
xxvi The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

one-world government proposed by some Muslims, such as Abu Bakr al-

Baghdadi, described by the American government as the “ringleader of the
Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant” (ISIL) (a term used synonymously
with Syria-Palestine). He thinks of himself as the political and religious
successor to the prophet Muhammad (c. 570–632 CE).
We can just as well imagine the lost of opportunity for development
and genius with the death of so many innocent people with this kind of
system of government, a system of government with a ruthless readiness
and ambition of using advance military science and technology, such as
modern artillery, machine-guns, jet fighters and nuclear physics (in order)
to develop a nuclear bomb, while imposing a primitive life style, mores and
standard of living for the common person common in the 6th and 7th cen-
tury of the Common Era, with a primitive one- man theocratic rule, in the
region we now call the Middle East. How long do you think that will last?

MEN WHO PILOTED THE WAY TO MODERN SCIENTIFIC

THOUGHT

While we can successfully argue there were more than three men in antiq-
uity responsible for such indisputable development of early scientific his-
tory – Socrates, Plato and Aristotle – it would be very difficult to find
men with greater influence. These three men were the pivotal builders of
modern science and, to a great extent, modern civilization today.

SOCRATES

Socrates (470/469–399 BC) was a classical Greek (Athenian) philosopher

(by definition: a person who loves wisdom) may not have been the first but
certainly one of the most significant founding fathers of modern scientific
thought for the Western Civilization. Known largely through the accounts
of classical writers more than 2,000 years ago, but more than ever through
the writings of his students, Plato (428/427 or 424/423–348/347 BCE)
and Xenophon (c. 430–354 BCE), Greek historian, soldier, mercenary and
student of Socrates, and from the plays of the contemporary Aristophanes
(c. 446–c. 386 BCE), a comic playwright of ancient Athens.
Introduction to the Science of Small Arms Ballistics xxvii

Socrates. (Source: Eric Gaba (User:Sting), July 2005. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/

Socrates#/media/File:Socrates_Louvre.jpg.
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/deed.en)

Perhaps the most complete reports or accounts of Socrates to survive

from antiquity came from Plato himself, though unclear as to the degree of
which Socrates may have been involved in these written versions. Plato’s
dialogues made it clear, however, of Socrates’ contributions to the field of
Ethics, and bringing to our attention the Socratic Method, or elenchus (“an
argument that refutes a proposition by proving the opposite of its conclu-
sions” – Encarta Dictionary).
It remains a familiar tool in a wide variety of discussions (such as gun
control), and is a type of pedagogy (or concern in the study and practice
of the best way to teach a person). His method starts off with a series
of questions – not only to extract individual answers – but to encourage
his students to develop a fundamental insight into the subject through the
process of participating in his dialog. Plato made it clear Socrates was
also responsible for making important and permanent contributions to
the field of Epistemology (the branch of philosophy concerned with the
nature and scope of knowledge and sometimes presented as a “theory of
knowledge”—Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia), and it remains a strong
foundation for much of western philosophy and our scientific thought and
endeavors today.
xxviii The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

PLATO

Plato (428/427 or 424/423–348/347 BCE) was a philosopher and mathema-

tician during the Classical Greece period (a 200-year period in Greek culture
from the 4th and 5th centuries BCE) almost 2,400 years ago. He created the
first institution of higher learning for us in the Western world and is widely
recognized as the most important figure in the development of philosophy
for us in the Western Civilization. Unlike nearly all of his philosophical
contemporaries, Plato’s entire work is believed to have survived intact for
over 2,365 years, and he is possibly one of the greatest writers in the entire
Western canon. The term – “Western Canon” – stands for a body of books,
music and art accepted by Western scholars as responsible for shaping our
Western culture. He is the pivotal figure responsible for our culture.
Alongside his teacher, Socrates, and his famous student, Aristotle,
Plato was truly responsible for the very fundamental development of
Western philosophy and science and, eventually, to the development of
the science of ballistics. He was not only a pivotal figure for Western sci-
ence, philosophy, and mathematics; he has also been named as one of the
founders of Western religion and spirituality and, above all, Christianity.

Plato: copy of portrait bust by Silanion

Introduction to the Science of Small Arms Ballistics xxix

ARISTOTLE

Aristotle, (which means “the best purpose”), was born in 384 BCE in
Stagira, Chalcidice, about 55 km (34 miles) east of Thessaloniki (Salon-
ika or Salonica, Greece), the second largest city in Greece and named
after princess Thessalonike of Macedon, half sister of Alexander the
Great.
Aristotle’s father was Nicomachus (c. 375 BCE), the personal physi-
cian to King Amyntas of Macedon (died 370 BCE). We have very little
real information about Aristotle’s childhood. We believe, however, he
probably spent some valuable time of his early life in the Macedonian
palace, and developed his first important associations with the Macedo-
nian monarchy at about the age of eighteen. He then moved to Athens to
continue his education at Plato’s Academy and, from there, remained for
nearly twenty years before leaving Athens in 348/47 BCE.
Aristotle then accompanied Xenocrates (c. 396/5–c. 314/3 BCE) to
the court of his friend, Hermias of Atarneus (originally a slave to Eubu-
lus, a Bithynian banker who ruled Atarneus), in Asia Minor (who was
also Aristotle’s father-in-law). From there, he traveled with Theophrastus

Bust of Aristotle. Marble, Roman copy after a Greek bronze original

by Lysippos from 330 BC.
xxx The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

(c. 371–c. 287 BCE), a Greek citizen of Eresos in Lesbos (the successor
to Aristotle in the Peripatetic school; a school of philosophy in Ancient
Greece) to the island of Lesbos, a Greek island located in the northeast-
ern Aegean Sea, and, together, researched the botany and zoology of this
island. See Sappho who was born between 630 and 612 BCE and died
around 570 BCE.
She was a Greek lyric poet who lived on the island of Lesbos. Some
historians have described her as one of the first known Lesbians in recorded
history and, hence, many Lesbians today use the island of Lesbos as their
Mecca, but not to the delight of the natives who live there. Some other
historians have disputed the notion she was homosexual. They argue it
was a horrendous misinterpretation of her poetry and wishful thinking on
the part of some Lesbians looking for emotional support and historical
justification for their homosexuality.
Aristotle married Pythias (died around 326 BCE), either Hermias’s
adoptive daughter or niece. She bore him a daughter, of whom they also
named Pythias. Soon after Hermias’ death, Aristotle was invited by Philip
II of Macedon (382–336 BCE) to become the tutor to his son Alexander
in 343 BCE.
Aristotle was appointed as the head of the royal academy of Macedon.
During that time, he gave lessons not only to Alexander, but also to two
other future kings, Ptolemy (c. 367–c. 283 BCE), a Macedonian general
under Alexander the Great and ruler of Egypt (323–283 BCE) and founder
of the Ptolemaic Kingdom and dynasty) and Cassandra (350–297 BCE),
King of the Kingdom of Macedon from 305 to 297 BCE, and son of Anti-
pater (c. 397–319 BCE) a Macedonian general, founder of the Antipatrid
dynasty and, in his youth, educated by Aristotle at the Lyceum (a type of
secondary school) in Macedonia.

FROM THE 10TH CENTURY ON . . .

For nearly 1,200 years, long after the death of Aristotle and his contem-
poraries, very little though and research was done by anyone concerning
science and philosophy, and particularly the physics of our planet – Earth.
In fact, as far as we can determine, outside of religion and the “proper”
Introduction to the Science of Small Arms Ballistics xxxi

interpretation of the Christian Holy Bible, preciously few people did

much thinking about anything else. Their whole lives evolved around
their Bible, making it impossible for most of them to even consider any-
thing other their immediate needs for survival, food for the winter, the
harvest and family, along with an enormous emphasis on death and life
after death (with very little scientific discussion, thought, debate or delib-
eration, if at all).
Long after the collapse of the Roman Empire, most people were simply
too busy trying to find enough food to eat, fighting to stay alive and fight-
ing each other. Not until the 10th century in the Common Era, did anyone
do some serious thinking beyond food, sex and raw survival.
There were several exceptions, of course. During the 10th century, there
were some Muslim astronomers who accepted that our Earth rotates around
its axis. Al-Biruni (973–1048 CE) reported there was Abu Sa’id Ahmed
ibn Mohammed ibn Abd al-Jalil al-Sijzi (al-Sinjari) (c. 945–c.1020 CE),
an Iranian Muslim astronomer, mathematician, and astrologer, who argued
“… that the motion we see is due to the Earth’s movement and not to that
of the sky …”
He purportedly made an “astrolabe” (an instrument used to make
astronomical measurements of the altitudes of celestial bodies, and in
navigation for calculating latitude, before the development of the sex-
tant), in a description detailed by al-Biruni, leading him to the conclu-
sion the motion we can see is directly due to the Earth’s rotation around
its axis. Hence, the sky is not rotating around the Earth. It is the other
way around.
As we can easily see now, it took a very long time for us to recover
from the collapse of the Roman Empire. After al-Sinjari (see above), sev-
eral important papers were written by some serious thinkers either to rebut
or to express reservations above Ptolemy’s argument that the Earth was
rotating around its axis; if true, they argued, everything would have to
violently blow off into Space.
Finally, in 1543 CE, Nicolaus Copernicus, a Renaissance mathema-
tician and astronomer, just before his death, published his “Heliocentric
World System” in his book entitled On the Revolutions of the Celestial
Spheres.
xxxii The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

NICOLAUS COPERNICUS

At the time of this publication, in 1543 CE, it was “…considered a major

event in the history of science, triggering the Copernican Revolution and
making an important contribution to the Scientific Revolution.” – Wikipe-
dia, the free encyclopedia

Nicolaus Copernicus.

… AND NOW WE ENTER THE AGE OF MODERN THOUGHT

AND DEVELOPMENT…

Nevertheless, in spite of this “… major event in the history of science

…,” we still have hundreds of years of academic struggle for freedom
of thought and development before we can proceed beyond a superficial
grasp of reality. Long before and after Nicolaus Copernicus, it was virtu-
ally impossible for most people to contradict the Roman Catholic Church;
everything written, whether scientific or not, had to be in harmony with
the “Sacred Scriptures.” If not, then the writer was subject to severe criti-
cism and punishment, including excommunications and even torture and
Introduction to the Science of Small Arms Ballistics xxxiii

death. Torture was the common tool to “persuade” him to admit to his
errors. In other words, torture was used to obtain confirmation of what the
Church wanted to hear, not to learn the truth.
We have that ugly situation today. One example would be the gun
control controversy in the American news media. Throughout this indus-
try, there is a strong “liberal bias” on the subject supporting gun control
though, in spite of their contentions to the contrary, most news report-
ers and journalists know little or nothing about it. Hence, when an editor,
news reporter, journalist or columnist receives an assignment to write on
this subject, perhaps in response to a mass shooting incident in a school
killing students and teachers alike, we will immediately find a strong pat-
tern of the writer researching the subject in order to confirm his precon-
ceived notions and arguments on the subject. We call this phenomenon
confirmation bias.

Confirmation Bias

This pattern of confirmation is always the same as it was hundreds of years

ago – no different from the confirmation patterns of the 10th to the 21st
centuries. Only the period of time and the players differ.
In respect to the gun control controversy, the writer, thinking of him-
self as intelligent – and he is – and conscientious – in which he is not, will
start off with a simple research program of accessing one of the search
engines common on internet today. Typically, he will type in certain com-
mon key words in the address box of the search engine and, invariably,
an unconscious bias will have led him to exactly what he wants to see, a
confirmation of what he thinks he knows to be true, whether from various
news organizations, anti-gun organizations and their articles and policy
papers or the anti-gun statistics we find in their literature. Subsequently,
his article will replicate confirmation of his bias and the bias of his work
place, where he may have picked it up in the first place.
A research of Nicolaus Copernicus’s professional history will reveal a
similar pattern but a pattern of other people criticizing him for his failure
to confirm their bias on the subject; for in this instance their bias is the
xxxiv The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

attitude the Bible and its scriptures are always correct and anything that
contradicts them are wrong and the work of the devil.
If we were to research Nicolaus Copernicus’s personal history, as well
as the personal histories of his contemporaries, we will find him – and
his contemporaries – to have been exceptionally well-educated – even
by today’s standards. He spoke several languages, as did most of them;
was a Renaissance mathematician and astronomer; a polyglot (a master of
multiple languages) and polymath (a person who mastered several differ-
ent subjects or bodies of knowledge); and who had obtained a doctorate
in canon law while practicing as a physician, classics scholar, translator,
governor, diplomat and economist. Even by today’s standards, that is an
enormous accomplishment. In the last 200,000 years, during the period
believed our species, the Humo Sapiens, have existed, there is an esti-
mated 60,000,000,000 men, women and children who have lived and died
and, during that time, preciously few of them have ever reached the pivotal
importance and accomplishments of Nicolaus Copernicus.
We will also find his enormous personal success was the direct results
of political connections with important and politically powerful people
along with the good fortune of having been born in a wealthy family. His
family had the wealth and political connections to give him the opportuni-
ties to grow and to live with comfort few men and women will ever experi-
ence in a life-time, including political and ecclesiastical connections to the
Roman Catholic Church. Those connections gave him power to influence
people in power and the opportunity to research anything of interest to
him, such as our Universe.
A study of this man’s life, however, will lead us to the conclusion it
was difficult for him, particularly during certain periods of his life, when
he began to perceive contradictions between biblical scriptures and his
observations of the physical universe physically observable to him (within
the science and technology available at the time). For he had everything
any man would want – wealth, power, education, family, etc. – everything
except for one thing, the freedom to think.
A man in his position, with his close association with the Church and
with all of his colleagues as members of the same Church, with the same
kind of education centered on the Bible’s Scared Scriptures, and the same
set of prejudices and biases of the Church and the Polish Intelligentsia of
Introduction to the Science of Small Arms Ballistics xxxv

the 16th century, it would not be just difficult but exceedingly dangerous
for him to “think outside of that box.”
As a Polish intellectual, scientist, scholar, etc., and his education con-
trolled by the Church, he was placed inside of a box without the freedom
to think outside of it. Any thought, theory or pronouncement in contradic-
tion to this system of constraints could easily lead to his arrest, confine-
ment, torture, death and even the entire destruction of his family. The
pressure on him must have been absolutely enormous; hence, the reason
his book, Dē revolutionibus orbium coelestium (On the Revolutions of
the Celestial Spheres), was not published until the year he had died in
1543. Several other important people have had similar life-situations,
such as Galileo.
We can find parallels of Copernicus’s life predicament to accomplished
people today, such as in the formal Soviet Union. Many years before its
collapse, a powerful mayor of a large city in the Soviet Union, during a
party with other powerful politicians and while participating in an infor-
mal conversation on economic and political reform in his country, woke
up the following morning to find himself in a psychiatric institution with
an enormous headache. He had been drugged in his drink the previous eve-
ning by someone who disapproved of his opinions. Now he must undergo
“psychiatric treatment,” his nurse told him, for having too many opinions
contrary to the standard and accepted ideology at the time. He spoke “out-
side of the box.”
Initially, there was very little controversy when Copernicus’s book
came out in print and without a fierce sermon, as was common when
someone of this caliber became known to the clerical intelligentsia of
those days. We are not sure of the reason it took nearly 60 years before the
Catholic Church finally took an official position against it with their first
step by the Magister of the Holy Palace (the Catholic Church’s chief cen-
sor), Dominican Bartolomeo Spina (1475–1546), who wanted to “stamp
out the Copernican doctrine.”
However, with Spina’s death, a well known theologian-astronomer,
the Dominican Giovanni Maria Tolosani of the Convent of St. Mark in
Florence (no personal information available), accepted the responsibili-
ties, as his friend, to write out a denunciation of the Dē revolutionibus
orbium coelestium before he saw a copy of it in 1544. His denunciation
xxxvi The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

was written a year later, in 1545, found in an appendix of his unpublished

work, On the Truth of Sacred Scripture.
Tolosani tried to disprove Nicolaus Copernicus’s book using a philo-
sophical argument and, all the while, calling upon Christian scriptures and
traditions as his evidence. His objective was to demonstrate Copernicus’s
hypothesis of the Heliocentric World System as completely absurd. It
lacked proof and clearly violated biblical scriptures, he argued.
“Nicolaus Copernicus neither read nor understood the arguments of
Aristotle the philosopher and Ptolemy the astronomer,” and added, he
“… is very deficient in the sciences of physics and logic… For it is stu-
pid to contradict an opinion accepted by everyone over a very long time
for the strongest reasons [Author’s emphasis], unless the impugner uses
more powerful and insoluble demonstrations and completely dissolves the
opposed reasons…”
John Calvin (1509–1564 CE), in his Commentary on Genesis, said,
“We indeed are not ignorant that the circuit of the heavens is finite, and
that the earth, like a little globe, is placed in the centre … For, just as in the
wheels of a chariot there is an axle that runs through the middle of them,
and the wheels turn around the axle by reason of the holes that are in the
middle of them, even so is it in the skies…” After all, “How could the
earth hang suspended in the air were it not upheld by God’s hand [Again,
the Author’s emphasis]?”

THE PEOPLE WHO CAME BEFORE NICOLAUS COPERNICUS

At reported earlier, Philolaus described a “Central Fire” dominated the

center of the universe, and a “counter-Earth” or “Antichthon” (a hypo-
thetical body in the Solar system also purposed by Philolaus), with the
Earth, Moon, the Sun and all of the planets, as well as all the stars, revolv-
ing around the “Central Fire.“ We do not understand the intellectual origin
of his theories, however.
Heraclides Ponticus (387–312 BCE) suggested the Earth may rotate
on its axis.
Aristarchus of Samos (310 BCE–c. 230 BCE) may have been the first
to advance a theory that the earth orbited around the sun. The mathematics
Introduction to the Science of Small Arms Ballistics xxxvii

of Aristarchus’ heliocentric system was worked out around 150 BCE by

the Hellenistic astronomer Seleucus of Seleucia (c. 190 BCE - c. 150
BCE), an astronomer and philosopher. There is a reference in Archimedes’
book of Syracuse (c. 287 BCE – c. 212 BCE), The Sand Reckoner (Archi-
medis Syracusani Arenarius & Dimensio Circuli), describing a work by
Aristarchus of his advancing the heliocentric model. The original work
by Aristarchus has been lost to history, unfortunately. Archimedes wrote:
“You (King Gelon) are aware the ‘universe’ is the name given by most
astronomers to the sphere the center of which is the center of the Earth,
while its radius is equal to the straight line between the center of the Sun
and the center of the Earth. This is the common account as you have heard
from astronomers. But Aristarchus has brought out a book consisting of
certain hypotheses, wherein it appears, as a consequence of the assump-
tions made, that the universe is many times greater than the ‘universe’
just mentioned. His hypotheses are that the fixed stars and the Sun remain
unmoved, that the Earth revolves about the Sun on the circumference of a
circle, the Sun lying in the middle of the Floor [sic], and that the sphere of
the fixed stars, situated about the same center as the Sun, is so great that
the circle in which he supposes the Earth to revolve bears such a propor-
tion to the distance of the fixed stars as the center of the sphere bears to its
surface.”–The Sand Reckoner (a work to determine the maximum number
of grains of sand that could fit into the universe; written by Archimedes).
Copernicus cited Aristarchus of Samos in an early manuscript of De
revolutionibus orbium coelestium (it still survives today), but removed the
reference from his final published manuscript.
Since some of the technical details in Copernicus’s Heliocentric
World System closely bear a resemblance to those developed earlier by
the Islamic astronomers, Naṣīr al-Dīn al-Ṭūsī (1201-1274 CE) and Ibn
al-Shāṭir (1304–1375 CE), although we have no evidence Nicolaus Coper-
nicus had read or had access to their works, it is easy for us to infer he did
and may have used some of their material in his work, with or without a
full consciousness of it. That is easy to do without awareness when we
read thousands of pages of technical texts over a period of many years.
We also have many instances of two or more people developing the same
concepts or inventions at the same time while not even aware of each
other’s existence.
xxxviii The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

A case in point would be the development of Calculus in the 17th

century Europe by Isaac Newton 1642–1726/7 CE) and Gottfried Wil-
helm Leibniz (1646–1716 CE), with elements of this kind of mathemat-
ics appearing in ancient India, Greece, China, medieval Europe, and the
Middle East over a period of at least 2,000 years.
In the early days of radio it was not uncommon for two people, unaware
of each other, to invent the same thing with either slight or significant
variations, and to introduce an application for a patent within a few days of
each other. Of course, that would immediately create a lot of controversy
and heavy litigation with suspicions and allegations of duplicity carrying
throughout the entire radio communications industry to this very day.
Aryabhata (476–550 CE) (first of the foremost mathematician-astrono-
mers from the classical age of Indian mathematics and astronomy), in his
Magnum opus Aryabhatiya (499 CE), put forward a planetary model of the
Earth spinning on its axis.
At the Maragha observatory (established in 1259 CE west of Maragheh,
East Azerbaijan Province, Iran), Najm al-Dīn al-Qazwīnī al-Kātibī (died
1276/7 CE), in his “Hikmat al-’Ain,” wrote an argument for a heliocentric
model, but discarded it later. There is then a Qutb al-Din Shirazi, (1236–
1311 CE), a 13th-century Persian polymath, poet and Arab Islamic astrono-
mer, who made contributions to astronomy, mathematics, medicine, physics,
music theory, Sufism (the study of the inner mystical dimension of Islam)
and philosophy. He developed a geocentric system employing mathematical
techniques, such as the Tusi couple (a small circle rotating inside of a larger
circle twice the diameter of the smaller circle). Urdi lemma, born c. 1200
CE, probably in Urd, Syria, a major figure in 13th-century Islamic astron-
omy, was also almost identical in his efforts to those of Nicolaus Copernicus
in the development of the heliocentric system in the 17th century.

PRELIMINARY SUMMARY

During Copernicus’ lifetime, overshadowing all of the theories on this

subject was Ptolemy’s “Almagest,” a treatise on the apparent motions
of the stars and planetary paths, written and published around 150 CE; a
hypothesis Earth was the stationary center of the universe with the stars
Introduction to the Science of Small Arms Ballistics xxxix

Ptolemaic model of the Universe with the Sun rotating around the Earth.

fixed in a large rotating outer sphere. His hypothesis was highly influen-
tial at the time and actually accepted as scientific fact for more than 1,200
years. Each of the planets, the Sun, and the Moon were also fixed in their
own but smaller spheres. Ptolemy’s system employed devices, including
epicycles (a geometric model used to explain the variations in speed and
direction of the apparent motion of the Moon, Sun, and planets), deferents
(the condition of submitting to the superior influence of the objects in
Outer Space) and equants (a mathematical concept developed by Claudius
Ptolemy in the 2nd century CE to explain the observed motion of the plan-
ets), to account for the observations that the paths of these bodies differed
from simple, circular orbits centered on the Earth. In other words, instead
of perceiving the orbits of the Moon, Earth and planets as elliptical paths
orbiting around the Sun, he perceived it as the Moon, Sun and planets as
circular paths orbiting around the Earth, but aware of the contradictions
in his calculations and unable to explain them in any other way, used epi-
cycles, deferents and equants as a type of psychological rationalization to
“explain away” these contradictions. Those systems of rationalizations in
the support of his hypothesis continued for more than 1,000 years before
xl The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

The above illustration is Copernicus’s conception of the Universe. Notice, although the
Sun is in the center of the Universe, all of the planets rotate around the Sun, which is
correct, but he depicts them. As rotating around the Sun in complete circles instead of
elliptical paths.

a trustworthy opposing argument and hypothesis by Nicolaus Copernicus

in 1543 CE.
While some people have disputed the dates, Nicolaus Copernicus’s De
revolutionibus orbium coelestium has been recognized as the beginning of
the scientific revolution in the Western Civilization from the year of 1543
of the Common Era.

THE PEOPLE WHO CAME AFTER NICOLAUS COPERNICUS

There were several distinctive phases in this scientific revolution started

by Copernicus; --initially, the first phase focused on the recovery of the
knowledge of the ancients, long forgotten by most people at the time, and
has been described as a Scientific Renaissance. With the publication of
Galileo’s Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems in 1632 CE,
this Scientific Renaissance was said to have ended starting with a new
age. The completion of the scientific revolution is attributed to the “grand
Introduction to the Science of Small Arms Ballistics xli

synthesis” by Isaac Newton’s 1687 Principia, that formulated the laws of

motion and universal gravitation. By the end of the 18th century, the sci-
entific revolution had given way to the Age of Reflection.
The concept of a scientific revolution taking place over an extended
period emerged in the eighteenth century with the work of Jean Sylvain
Bailly (1736–1793), who saw a two-stage process of sweeping away the
old and establishing the new. He was a French astronomer, mathematician,
freemason and political leader in the earlier phase of the French Revolu-
tion He served as the mayor of Paris from 1789 to 1791, but guillotined
during the Reign of Terror (from September 5, 1793 to July 28, 1794) for
refusing to testify against Marie Antoinette.
Then it gets a little complicated. Although Nicolaus Copernicus’s
heliocentric theory was generally accepted almost universally in Europe,
there were only about 15 astronomers actively promoting his theory. Georg
Joachim Rheticus (1514–1574) had the potential of becoming Coperni-
cus’s successor if it were not for his crimes. In April 1551, he was accused
of raping the son of Hans Meusel, a merchant. According to Jack Rep-
check, in his Copernicus’s Secret: How the Scientific Revolution Began,
Rheticus allegedly “plied him with a strong drink, until he was inebriated;
and finally did with violence overcome him and practice upon him the
shameful and cruel vice of sodomy [an offensive term for anal intercourse
of children, adults or animals]”. A year later, he was found guilty and ban-
ished from Leipzig for 101 years.
Erasmus Reinhold (1511–1553), unfortunately, died prematurely at the
young age of 42. A colleague of Georg Joachim Rheticus, he catalogued a
large number of stars but rejected the heliocentric cosmology (the study of
the origin, evolution and future of the universe) by Copernicus on physical
and theological grounds. With that rejection, he was committed to the Bib-
lical scriptures and Ptolemy’s Almagest (a mathematical and astronomical
treatise on the apparent motions of the stars and planetary paths written in
the 2nd century CE).
Apparently, the first of the really great successors to Nicolaus
Copernicus was Tycho Brahe (1546–1601), but did not believe the
Earth rotated around the Sun. He was well known during his lifetime
as an astronomer, astrologer and alchemist and, recently, described as
a highly competent mind in modern astronomy who held a passion for
xlii The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

facts derived empirically; yet, he also proved unable to separate these

facts from Biblical scriptures and Ptolemy’s Almagest written nearly
1,400 years earlier.

TYCHO BRAHE

There were people, such as Thomas Digges (no information available) and
Thomas Harriot (1560–1621) of England; Giordano Bruno (1548–1600)
and Galileo Galilei (1564–1642) of Italy.
Diego Zuniga (1536–1597) was from Spain.
Simon Stevin (1548–1620) worked as a Flemish mathematician, physi-
cist and military engineer of the Low Countries.
In Germany, there was an exceptional group of successors, such as
Georg Joachim Rheticus (1514–1574), known for his trigonometric tables
and as Nicolaus Copernicus’s sole pupil; Michael Maestlin (1550–1631)
a German astronomer and mathematician, known for being the mentor of

Tycho Brahe (1546 to 1601).

Introduction to the Science of Small Arms Ballistics xliii

Johannes Kepler; Christoph Rothmann (born between 1550 and 1560 and
died probably sometime after 1600 and who may have later recanted on
his views), and Johannes Kepler (1571–1630), a German mathematician,
astronomer, and astrologer, and certainly an crucial person in the 17th cen-
tury scientific revolution.
We have some additional possibilities: The Englishmen William Gil-
bert (1544–1603); Achilles Gasser (1505–1577), a German physician and
astrologer and supporter of both Copernicus and Rheticus; Georg Vogelin
Otto (no information available) and Tiedemann Giese (1480–1550), a pro-
ponent of heliocentrism by Nicolaus Copernicus.
The intellectual atmosphere lingered for years dominated by Aristo-
tle’s work and the Ptolemaic astronomy. Few were able to accept the Nico-
laus Copernicus heliocentric theory. It violated the Church’s scriptures and
more than 1,500 years of precedence; even today, few men would have the
emotional and personality skills and tools to contradict such power.
Tycho Brahe’s theory, in spite of his enormous empirical work and
accomplishments, held the theory our Earth is stationary, with the Moon
revolving around it; the Sun revolving around the Earth and all of the other
planets revolving around the Sun. That, of course, directly contradicted
Copernicus’s heliocentric theory.
About 50 years later, Kepler’s and Galileo’s work provided a substan-
tial and solid evidence supporting Copernicus’s theory, probably origi-
nating when Galileo first formulated the principle of inertia to explain
the reason everything would not fall off if the Earth were in motion, and
when Isaac Newton developed a universal law of gravity and the laws of
mechanics in his 1687 book, Principia. That led to the development of
a unified terrestrial and celestial theory of mechanics. From there, there
began a general acceptance of Nicolaus Copernicus’s Heliocentric World
System.
In the Copernican system, the Earth and other planets orbited the Sun;
while in the Ptolemaic System, everything in the Universe orbited the
Earth.
xliv The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

JOHANNES KEPLER

Johannes Kepler (1571–1630) was a German mathematician, astronomer

and astrologer, and an important figure in the scientific revolution of the
17th century. Best known for his laws of planetary motion, he built them
on his works in Astronomia nova, Harmonices Mundi (The Harmony of
the World) and Epitome of Copernican Astronomy. They represent a cru-
cial foundation for Isaac Newton’s later theory of universal gravitation
and, without Kepler’s work, it will have been much more difficult for
Newton to have developed such a theory. He later became an assistant to
Tycho Brahe and the imperial mathematician to Emperor Rudolf II. He did
work in the field of optics and invented an improvement of the refracting
telescope we now call the Keplerian Telescope.
Not a true scientist by today’s standard, motivated and driven by his
religious conviction and his infallible belief in God; he incorporated reli-
gious arguments and logic into his scientific work. To him, God created the
world in harmony to an intelligible plan we could access through the light

Johannes Kepler (1571–1630).

Introduction to the Science of Small Arms Ballistics xlv

of reason; his work confirmed it, he reasoned. Even though an integral part
of the Scientific Revolution of the 17th century, he was nevertheless not a
true scientist; however, his work made a most significant contribution to
the development of modern science, a contribution we cannot ignore.

GALILEO GALILEI

Galileo Galilei (1564–1642), an Italian astronomer, physicist, engineer,

philosopher and mathematician, played a major role in the Scientific
Renaissance. His achievements include improvements to the telescope and
the subsequent astronomical observations and support for heliocentrism.
Galileo has been called the “father of modern observational astronomy,”
the “father of modern physics,” and the “father of modern science.”
He contributed significantly to observational astronomy plus the con-
firmation of the phases of Venus, the discovery of the four largest moons of
Jupiter and the observation and analysis of the sunspots. He even invented
an improved version of a military compass as well as other instruments.

Galileo Galilei (1564–1642).

xlvi The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

His support of Nicolaus Copernicus’s heliocentrism led to a great deal

of controversy throughout his life at the time most people accepted either
Aristotle’s Geocentrism or the Tychonic system.
This whole matter was investigated by the Roman Inquisition in 1615.
They came out with the conclusion that it could be a possibility but not as
a reputable fact.
He defended his position in a book entitled, Dialogue Concerning the
Two Chief World Systems, and alienated Pope Urban VIII when it appeared
to have attacked him.
The Inquisition tried him for being “vehemently suspect of heresy;”
he was to recant and required to spend the rest of his life under “house
arrest.” It was then he wrote perhaps his finest scientific work, the Two
New Sciences.
After his publication of Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World
Systems, the Roman Inquisition banned the publication of all of his works,
including books he might write in the future. It did not seem to matter
whether or not any following material in the future could or would violate
Biblical scriptures. They apparently assumed the worse.
After the failure of his initial attempts to publish Two New Sciences in
France, Germany and Poland, it was published in Leiden, South Holland,
where the writ of the Inquisition produced fewer adverse effects. Fra Ful-
genzio Micanzio (1570–1654), the official theologian of the Republic of
Venice, had, at first, offered to help Galileo publish his book in Venice, but
pointed out that publishing the Two New Sciences in Venice might cause
Galileo unnecessary trouble; however, the book was, in spite of this poten-
tial trouble, published in Holland. Yet, Galileo did not seem to suffer any
harm from the Inquisition for publishing this book given that, in January
1639, the book reached Rome’s bookstores with about 50 copies quickly
sold. On the face of it, everyone liked it.
His opponents sometimes used the biblical excerpts of Psalm 93:1,
96:10, and 1 Chronicles 16:30 to attack heliocentrism. That included texts
stating that “the world is firmly established, it cannot be moved.”
In Psalm 104:5 it says, “The Lord set the earth on its foundations; it
can never be moved.”
Introduction to the Science of Small Arms Ballistics xlvii

What’s more, Ecclesiastes 1:5 says that “… And the sun rises and sets
and returns to its place.” Galileo argued heliocentrism did not contradict
biblical texts.
By 1615, Galileo’s submitted his material on heliocentrism to the
Roman Inquisition; but his greatest offense, from the view of the Roman
Catholic Church, was his efforts to reinterpret the Bible, viewed as a vio-
lation of the Council of Trent and dangerously resembling Protestantism.
Only the Church can interpret the Bible.
An Inquisitorial commission, in February 1616, affirmed heliocentrism
to be “foolish and absurd in philosophy, and formally heretical since it
explicitly contradicts in many places the sense [sic] of Holy Scripture.”
Pope Paul V instructed Cardinal Bellarmine to present this decision to
Galileo and to order him to abandon his opinion heliocentrism was physi-
cally factual. Then, on February 26, Bellarmine called Galileo to his resi-
dence and ordered him to abandon his opinion that the sun is stationary at
the center of the world while the earth moves around it and, from this time
forth, not to hold, teach, or to defend it in any way, either orally or in the
written word.
The sentence of the Inquisition was delivered on June 22. It consisted
of three parts:
Galileo was found “vehemently suspect of heresy,” namely of having
held the opinions that the Sun lies motionless at the centre of the universe,
that the Earth is not at its centre and moves, and that one may hold and
defend an opinion as probable after it has been declared contrary to Holy
Scripture. He was required to “abjure, curse and detest” those opinions.
He was sentenced to formal imprisonment at the pleasure of the Inqui-
sition. On the following day this was commuted to house arrest, which he
remained under for the rest of his life.
His offending Dialogue was banned; and in an action not announced at
the trial, publication of any of his works was forbidden, including any he
might write in the future.
Allegedly, after recanting his theory that the Earth moved around the
Sun, he muttered the rebellious phrase, “And yet it moves.” He was refer-
ring to the Earth moving around the Sun.
xlviii The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

ISAAC NEWTON

Sir Isaac Newton (1642–1726/7), an English physicist and mathema-

tician, but in his time described as a “natural philosopher,” was widely
acknowledged as one of the most prominent scientists and as a central
figure in the scientific revolution. His book Philosophiæ Naturalis Prin-
cipia Mathematica (“Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy”),
and first published in 1687; laid the fundamental principles for the devel-
opment of classical mechanics. Newton made vital contributions to the
science of optics; and it is now clear both he and Gottfried Leibniz (1646
–1716) invented calculus independently of each other and almost at the
same time; although at that time, many people did not think so. It created
an enormous controversy among the contemporary mathematicians and
gradually destroyed the relationship between the two men.

Isaac Newton (1642–1726/7).

Introduction to the Science of Small Arms Ballistics xlix

Newton’s law of universal gravitation

Newton states “that any two bodies in the universe attract each other with
a force that is directly proportional to the product of their masses and
inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them,” a gen-
eral physical law of gravity of paramount importance he derived from
empirical observations. Of course, we cannot neglect the work of several
other physicists, such as Robert Hooke (1635–1703), actually also an Eng-
lish natural philosopher, architect and polymath, who, in a communica-
tions with the Royal Society in 1666, slowly drew similar conclusions
but without the mathematical hypothesis of the gravitational attraction
“inversely proportional to the square of distance” between the “celestial
bodies” in the Universe.
Newton’s work eventually became an integral part of classical mechan-
ics he formulated in Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica (“the
Principia”); he first published on July 5, 1687. It is now obvious, after a
study of this subject and Newton’s work; Newton did not develop his laws
of universal gravitation in a vacuum. Several other people, including Rob-
ert Hooke, made significant contributions to influence his hypothesis, as
would be common with all of us when the time is ripe for such intellectual
activity. No one else works in a vacuum, either!
Gravity or gravitation has been now recognized as a “natural phenom-
enon” in the Universe in which everything with mass “gravitates” toward
each other and that it is mass that makes up everything in the Universe –
stars, planets, galaxies, light and even sub-atomic particles.
Gravity even creates spheres of hydrogen and ignites them under
intense pressure to form stars and then groups them into galaxies.
It is gravity that makes our Universe what it is and gives it weight to
everything else if it contains mass. Gravity on the Moon even causes the
tides on our planet, but while not subject to absorption by or conversion to
anything else. Nor can we, at least presently, remove or shield ourselves
against gravity. It is always present if there is mass.

WHAT HAS ALL OF THIS LED TO?

At this point in time, when Newton had worked out a theory of grav-
ity, within a very short period of time it led to the development of other
l The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

theories of the physical world, most notably the study of light, energy,
kinetic energy, mass, weight, velocity, acceleration due to gravity, drag,
the recognition of the parabolic trajectory, the effect of the Earth’s rotation
over the deflection of moving projectiles, etc.
All of these studies, and many others, were absolutely necessary before
it could lead to the modern development of the science of ballistics, its
subsequent engineering applications and scientific outshoots, including
the critical need for the development of calculus by Newton and Leibniz.
Calculus made this Science workable by providing a method to calculate
trajectory, depth of penetration or the effect of field-effect over time, tra-
jectory or gravity, etc – all in real-time we can now easily do with high-
speed digital computers.
Until recently, without such computers, even with advance calculus,
there was no such capability. Slide rulers and manual computations were
simply not adequate, and far too slow, to handle these problems due to the
huge number of iterations.
Even with a simple computation of the transfer of energy, without tak-
ing into consideration of the other two components of drag, computing in
increments of cubic inches for small-arm ballistics, there are no less than
3,600 iterations of computation for every interval of 100 yards. Until the
development of the 80186 micro-processor, it would take at least 30 min-
utes to compute out to every 100 yards; impossible for real-time require-
ments; then that the 80186 micro-processor took almost 20 minutes.
Finally, with the 80486, the speed was dropped down to approximately
nine seconds, still nowhere near real-time computations for anything real-
istic out to anywhere near 1,000 yards for small arms, and certainly noth-
ing we can use for field artillery. Up to that time, all computations were
approximate and very inaccurate if we were striving for precision, usually
calculating in intervals of 100 yards. Computing in intervals of 100 yards,
by the way, instead of cubic inches could easily cause inaccurate results in
excess of 40 percent when computing out to 500 yards, a totally unsatis-
factory solution to this problem.
Then that would only apply to the calculation of the loss of kinetic
energy and velocity through transfer of energy. It would not include the
other two components of drag or the algorithms to include the calculation
of a bullet’s trajectory above or below baseline in small arm ballistics.
Introduction to the Science of Small Arms Ballistics li

Analog computers took much longer, actually several hours in the days
when each computer came with its own individual operating system and
language and could easily cost a million dollars a piece with follow-up
logistics and maintenance programs by the manufacture, making real-time
computations even much more unlikely. The technology was simply not
available.
Until the development of such computers became available, this Sci-
ence was literally on “hold.” Just before and during the Second World
War, analog computers were in use for the calculation of a projectile’s
trajectory in field artillery, coastal artillery and ship-to-ship artillery, and
to calculate for the compensation of the coriolis effect (the calculation of
the projectile’s deflection, due to Earth’s rotation on its axis, to the right in
the Northern Hemisphere or to the left in the Southern Hemisphere) (very
important when dealing with distances substantially beyond 1,000 yards).
Or, else, we would not hit an object the size of an aircraft carrier at 10
miles with a 2,000 pound projectile.
Then, about the same time, there was also an urgent need for comput-
ers to handle the critical computations in nuclear physics when working
toward the development of the first Atomic bomb in the 1940’s. Yet, they
were still far too slow for real-time computations and, in many respects
that is still true today even with the advance processors presently on the
market. We are still waiting for other more advance developments in
smaller packages for real-time small arm ballistic computations out in the
field.
During the Second World War, the British intelligence community
developed an electrical/mechanical computer they called the “Bomb” to
decode German secret messages they intersected from their radio transmis-
sions. Initially, it took several days to decode one message from German
Headquarters to a command out in the field. Then, as the British decod-
ing mathematicians improved their grasp of the protocol and procedures
used by German cryptographers, they rapidly developed the algorithms to
increase the speed of decoding messages to several minutes.
The Americans had similar problems with the development of the first
nuclear submarine, the Nautilus, during the 1950s. When President Eisen-
hower had ordered the U.S. Navy to send the Nautilus on an expedition
under the polar ice in the North Pole, they soon discovered the lack of
lii The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

sufficient “computing power” a serious handicap. In those days, comput-

ers were still mechanical or electrical/mechanical monstrosities far too big
and heavy to put inside of a submarine. They were necessary for both
navigation and the safe control of the nuclear reactor which were, at that
time, operated manually for lack of “computing power. “
As we can see, it was not just the lack of “computing power” before
we could get to this level of technical development, it took nearly 1,200
years for someone to perceive, understand and to work out the mathemati-
cal relationship of gravity. Without it, there can be no science of ballistics.
Access to a powerful computer will not have been enough; however, it is
absolutely essential in order to apply the mathematics as we shall see in
the following chapters.
For a real science of ballistics to develop, then again, we needed to
understand the Earth is round, rotates on its axis and rotates around the
Sun. Then, we needed to perceive, recognize and to work out the mathe-
matical relationship of gravity, acceleration due to gravity (for the calcula-
tion and prediction of a bullet’s trajectory, as one example; or to calculate
a bullet’s weight, as another example); aerodynamic drag, drag induced by
the surface area of the nose, drag induced by the surface area of the cylin-
der, transfer of energy and deflections of falling bodies.
We needed to understand this effect of gravity over everything on our
planet for us to understand things will not fly off into space due to the rota-
tion on its axis, as did Claudius Ptolemy thought in the 2nd century of the
Common Era.
Still, we had people, such as Giovanni Battista Riccioli (1598–1671),
who disputed Copernicus’s model of the Earth rotating around its axis,
nearly a century after his death, due to his inability to observe the eastward
deflections of falling bodies recognized today as the coriolis effect (see the
Chapter on the coriolis effect) in the Northern Hemisphere.
Algebra, another critically important development, can be traced to the
ancient Babylonians (historically, a period between 1800 and 1600 BCE,
the kind of information we derived from their clay tablets) all the way up
to the present, now with at least 21 different developed fields.
Geometry, a science of mathematics originating from Ancient Greece,
is a branch concerned with questions of shape, size, relative position of
figures and the properties of space, all of it important in the calculations
Introduction to the Science of Small Arms Ballistics liii

of a projectile’s physical parameters, either in small-arm ballistics or any

projectile in free-flight. As an example, we would need to use geometry to
aide in the calculation of the bullet’s drag induced by the surface area of
the nose and drag induced by the surface area of the cylinder.
When we study this history, leading to the development of the science
of ballistics, we must take into account the enormous difficulties of every
person in this chain of development, including people who did not make
contributions for whatever reason, but came close to it.
From Aristotle’s time to the present, over a period of more than 2,500
years, every person, successful or not, had his own problems, sometimes
insurmountable. He had to start from nothing, originally with no support,
material comfort or technical resources. All he had was his brain with an
intellectual curiosity, desire and capability to understand his world around
him. It was not easy; – in fact, for most people, it was impossible. Hence,
very, very few people made such a notable gain toward the development of
a real insight and knowledge of physical reality. During that same period
of time, long before it and certainly to the present, most of this develop-
ment was nonsense and sometimes dangerous. It led to many false paths
and to the destruction of countless lives through intolerance and sheer
ignorance, sometimes jealousy and all too frequently wars.
Throughout our entire human history, without a single exception, we
have been in a constant state of war somewhere on this planet and, with
preciously few exceptions; every one of them started by someone, or a
group of people, motivated and driven by a quest for power, the kind of
power without responsibility, transparency or accountability.
When we look back at world history, as far back as we can, from pre-
history to our present history, it has been a history of people striving for
advantages, privileges and power over everyone else. From before the
time of ancient Babylonia, to the Persian Empire, to the Roman Empire,
to the Ottoman Empire, to the recent particularly destructive Nazi German
Empire, not excluding the primitive dynasties in ancient Egypt, there was
very little permanency in anything they did, except for the permanency in
the history of their existence.
Ancient China was constantly in war with each other and constantly
driving their enemy tribes west of them further west into Eastern Europe
and, finally, to Western Europe, to continually challenge the authority,
liv The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

privileges and power of the Roman Empire, an empire with an economy

based on slavery (as was true with most empires) (with the British empire
as an important exception), until this Empire finally collapsed from too
many enemies, too many battles and the exhaustion of their resources and
manpower.
Nor can we exclude the ancient primitive empires in both Latin Amer-
ica and South America. They were no different! Their economies were also
based on slavery while stealing wealth from their neighbors, subsequently
making real scientific and material development almost impossible – and
sometimes completely impossible.
This pattern has always been the same. People in a position of power
use their position of power to exploit the availability of resources out-
side their immediate sphere of influence in order to expand their sphere of
influence. As in the case of ancient Rome, but equally true with every other
empire, once the person or people in power had completed the consolida-
tion of power, the immediate objective was always to expand into other
territories (look at Nazi Germany and the Empire of Japan as recent exam-
ples). With superior military power, they would conquer the land outside
of their own sphere of influence by killing the men and women who fought
against them and then reducing the remaining population into slavery and
poverty, and all the while stealing their wealth and material resources.
This always had the effect of destroying careers, lives and opportunities;
hence the reason it took so long to get this far and, if that were not enough,
we ought to consider the colossal number of people who have died prema-
turely from disease.

INTRODUCTION IN THE SCIENCE OF SMALL ARMS BALLISTICS

“Ballistics, [is the] science of the propulsion, flight, and impact of pro-
jectiles. It is divided into several disciplines. Internal and external bal-
listics, respectively, deal with the propulsion and the flight of projectiles.
The transition between these two regimes is called intermediate ballistics.
Terminal ballistics concerns the impact of projectiles; a separate category
encompasses the wounding of personnel.”
—Encyclopedia Britannica
Introduction to the Science of Small Arms Ballistics lv

“(General Physics) (functioning as singular) the study of the flight

dynamics of projectiles, either through the interaction of the forces of pro-
pulsion, the aerodynamics of the projectile, atmospheric resistance, and
gravity (exterior ballistics), or through these forces along with the means
of propulsion, and the design of the propelling weapon and projectile
(interior ballistics)”
—The Free Dictionary by Farlex

DEFINITION

Ballistics – the 61st branch of the science of Physics – starts from particle
physics, which deals with the study of sub-atomic particles travelling at
or very near the speed of light and stops at the physics of time, presently
a non-existent science which, if it were to exist, would deal with the study
of the relationships and the phenomena of light, gravity, electromagneti-
cism, etc., responsible for the expansion and contraction of time. Evolving
as other offshoots would be scores of new sciences, such as the science of
Ballistic Signatures or the science of Force-Fields.
Ballistics, specifically, deals with the study of relatively large projec-
tiles travelling at relatively slow velocities and always substantially below
the speed of light and always in free-flight.
Its study starts at the precise moment of ignition of the propellant;
to the study of the patterns and relationships of the projectile travelling
through the bore; to the calculations and predictions of flight and finally to
the study of the patterns and relationships between the projectile in flight,
the terminal flight in the target and the target itself.
Traditionally, Ballistics has been divided into three major categories:
Interior Ballistics, Exterior Ballistics and Terminal Ballistics.
• Interior Ballistics contains several topics, concepts, theories and re-
lationships never before in print. Starting with the characteristics and
instructions for reloading ammunition, it goes into Statistics, Kinetic
Energy and the Theory of Twist with equations to calculate the best
rate of twist, when designing a barrel; best muzzle velocity for a
given bullet and rate of twist, when we must work with a given barrel
and twist; best bullet for a given muzzle velocity and rate of twist,
lvi The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

when we can design a bullet for a given muzzle velocity and rate of
twist; and the Theory of Spin and Bullet Geometry.
• Exterior Ballistics will also contain several new topics, concepts,
theories and relationships; including The Field-Effect Theory; The
Effect of Field-Effect Over Time; The Effect of Gravity Over Time;
The Effect of Field-Effect Over Trajectory; and an highly advance
method to calculate trajectory in real-time with the algorithms to
calculate the Maximum Range of Lethality and Maximum Effective
Range.
• Terminal Ballistics will be no exception, either. It will contain the
Theory of Transfer of Energy; Acceptance of Energy; Reflection
of Energy; a Theory of Penetration and the algorithms to calculate
depth of penetration into living tissue, and the range of lethality be-
yond penetration. Indeed, we sincerely hope and desire that this en-
tire book should represent an enormous advancement for the science
of ballistics and certainly for all members of every community.
SECTION ONE
CHAPTER 1

THE SCIENCE OF
INTERIOR BALLISTICS

CONTENTS

1.1 Definition ......................................................................................... 3

1.2 The Problems and Methods of Designing and Reloading
Ammunition ..................................................................................... 4
1.3 Timing Is Everything ..................................................................... 12
1.4 The Correct Ratio to the Remaining Case Capacity ...................... 14
1.5 Reloading Ammunition for a Particular Gun ................................. 18
1.6 Testing and “Tuning” ..................................................................... 21
1.7 Further Refinement ........................................................................ 22

1.1 DEFINITION

Interior ballistics is the scientific study of the physical phenomena that

occurs inside and outside of the receiver and barrel of a gun.
Its study starts at the precise moment the firing pin strikes the primer
and stops at the precise moment the bullet leaves the barrel.
It includes a study of the effects and characteristics of gunpowder at the
precise moment of ignition and continues until the bullet leaves the barrel.
It includes the study of the bullet’s spin and the barrel’s rate of twist.
It also includes the study of the effects and characteristics of the out-
side physical environment over the environment inside of the receiver and
barrel.
4 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

1.2 THE PROBLEMS AND METHODS OF DESIGNING AND

RELOADING AMMUNITION

In conventional reloading circles, the normal procedure to reload ammuni-

tion is to get a simple reloading press, the appropriate dies for the caliber
and cartridge, a pile of new or spent cartridge cases, some primers, and
perhaps a pound or two of gunpowder. Then, with all the necessary equip-
ment and material in hand, we would study the first available “reloading
handbook” or “manual” for a “recommended load.”
All gunpowder and most bullet manufacturers provide a manual to list
their “recommended loads” for each cartridge. Some of these manuals are
enormous books in actual physical size, and others represent nothing but
a sheet or two of paper with some data. Each gunpowder manufacturer
provides a comparison chart to allow the reloader to compare the burning
rate characteristics and time-pressure curves of one particular powder to
another particular powder, usually starting with the fastest burning powder
on the left or top of the sheet of paper and moving to the slowest burning
powder to the right or bottom of the paper. Then, starting with the smallest
caliber, they would list a range of minimum and maximum recommended
loads for each gunpowder suitable for each cartridge of each caliber and
bullet weight.
Some gunpowder manufactures only recommend one load for each
powder and bullet combination for each cartridge. The load usually rep-
resents the maximum charge of powder which: (1) fills up between 87%
and 93% of the remaining case capacity (RCC) and (2) at the same time
produces the maximum chamber pressure for the cartridge for which it
may have been designed to handle.
On the other hand, bullet manufacturers tend to provide enormously
comprehensive reloading manuals and handbooks to serve the entire
shooting community with an exhaustive supply of technical data and rec-
ommendations. Whether a sheet of paper or a large book of data, we rec-
ommend that each shooter and reloader collects and keeps everything he
finds on the subject.
The Science of Interior Ballistics 5

1.2.1 THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN SMOKELESS

GUNPOWDER AND BLACK POWDER EXPLOSIVES

If we were to place a very small portion of smokeless gunpowder (a progres-

sive burning powder) and also a small portion of black powder (an explo-
sive) onto a mental pan or plate, the difference between the two will become
immediately obvious once we have ignited them with a spark or fire.
Ignition of black powder will cause an explosion. All the potential
energy burns within a fraction of a second taking the characteristics of a
violent explosion and gone in a flash. Using black powder as the propel-
lant in a gun, depending on the exact composition and ratio of the three
components to each other as well as to the manufacturing process, black
powder burns or explodes faster than the bullet can leave the barrel. In
fact, a black powder revolver, as an example, may burn out completely
before the bullet even leaves the cylinder, or it may completely burn out
half-way through the barrel. Timing is extremely difficult, and the exact
manufacturing process is critical to the timing. Timing is controlled by the
composition of black powder, which is still, an explosive!
Smokeless gunpowder, on the other hand, is a progressive burning
propellant – not an explosive. When we ignite it with a spark or fire, the
potential energy in the fuel will not burn out completely immediately.
Instead, it burns faster and faster over a period of time until it runs out of
fuel and then stops. Igniting several grains of smokeless gunpowder in a
pan or plate causes the flame to rise higher and higher as it burns faster and
faster until it runs out of fuel and then stops – just as abruptly.
It is very different than black powder or any other explosive. Again,
timing is critically important. We want the powder to stop burning at the
precise moment the bullet leaves the barrel. If it stops burning too soon
or too late, it adversely affects accuracy downrange. In that respect, it
is no different than black powder. The only real difference is our abil-
ity to control the burning rate characteristics and time-pressure curves
of smokeless gunpowder for superior consistency of accuracy and also
burns cleaner with much less remaining residue in the barrel or cylinder,
if a resolver. Residue in the barrel, as it accumulates with each succes-
sive shot, adversely affects accuracy until it becomes almost impossible to
obtain any degree of consistency and accuracy. Black powder requires we
6 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

clean the barrel frequently or preferably after each shot, while we can eas-
ily shoot with smokeless gunpowder literally thousands of rounds without
cleaning it. One way of looking at this subject of black powder vs. smoke-
less gunpowder is to compare the operation of an automatic weapon, such
as the M-16, to the differences in the performance characteristics of black
powder and smokeless gunpowder.
As we write this, there are well over 100 smokeless gunpowders avail-
able on the open market for the recreational shooter in the United States.
They range from extremely fast, in their burning rate characteristics, to
extremely slow. We have included in this text 38 smokeless gunpowders
available for rifles; 25 for shotguns; and another 25 for handguns. Many
other powders are available but not listed here. Many of them are inter-
changeable. Many are not. We can use some very fast powders such as
Unique or SR-4756 for shotguns, handguns, and even rifles for special
single-shot applications, particularly with cast lead bullets, and others
suitable for automatic weapons such as H-335 or IMR-3031 (notably for
the M-16) in mid-range between very fast and very slow. Or we can go
into the very slow rifle powders such as IMR-4831 and H-570, for the .50
caliber machine gun or some of the semi-automatic .50 caliber sport rifles
presently on the market. Each smokeless powder, from the very fast to the
very slow, has its value and application – and none is useless.
Black powder has its value and application, too, although not as flex-
ible and versatile as modern smokeless powders. It is also very messy and
greasy. That can be true with smokeless powders as well, depending on the
lead alloy, type, chamber pressure, and lubricate.
If we can safely load black powder into the cartridge case for the M-16,
the 5.56 × 45 mm, we will find enough energy to propel the bullet out of
the barrel; but the powder will burn so fast, being an explosive, it will not
produce the proper time-pressure curve to operate the automatic action.
Instead, the spent cartridge case will stay in the receiver, immediately in
front of the bolt, unable to extract the spent cartridge case or to reload the
chamber with a new unspent cartridge. Then, there will an enormous greasy
mess in the chamber and barrel making it necessary to clean it, or it may
not even be possible to place a new cartridge into the chamber (Figure 1.1).
We can easily obtain the same results with very fast or very slow
smokeless powders as well until we find the right powder to produce the
The Science of Interior Ballistics 7

FIGURE 1.1 The M-16A1.

correct chamber pressure and time-pressure curve to propel the bullet out
of the barrel, for the powder to stop burning at the precise moment the bul-
let leaves the barrel and, at the same time, the automatic action extracts the
spent cartridge case and chambers a new one ready to fire.
The powders below are only approximate in relation to each other. Each
powder burning rate characteristics will shift in relation to each other with
a change in temperature to its relationship to the remaining case capacity,
bullet weight, type and strength of crimp around the cartridge case, car-
tridge dimensional characteristics including thickness of the cartridge case
walls, depth of bullet in the case, bullet distance to the throat of the bore,
and certainly to the dimensional characteristics of the bore (including bore
diameter) and length of the barrel.
Additionally, working out this chart at first became highly complex
and difficult but later nearly impossible. When we wrote a letter to each
gunpowder manufacturer for technical assistance, we discovered the exis-
tence of great reluctance to cooperate with us. With one exception, each of
these manufacturers had either ignored us or had responded with a direct
refusal. One manufacturer, upon receipt of our letter, responded through
their attorney who promptly wrote a letter in an obvious attempt to intimi-
date us to stop asking for technical assistance. So, we sincerely apologize
for any inherent inaccuracy in this comparison chart. We could do no bet-
ter under the circumstances.
As we stated above in the image of the M-16A1, black powder burns
all of its energy in one big explosion instead of gradually burning up its
fuel and building up pressure over a period of time as is true with smoke-
less powder. This gradual build-up of pressure over time, the time-pressure
8 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

curve, is necessary – not just to operate the automatic action of an auto-

matic weapon such as the M-16A1 – but to time it to stop burning at the
precise moment the bullet leaves the barrel. That is not possible or easy to
do with black powder.
We need a progressive burning powder that burns up all its fuel more
gradually over a longer period of time than is possible with an explosive
such as black powder. When we look at Table 1.1, for the rifle powders
in the comparison chart for gunpowders today, we will see 38 different
powders suitable for a rifle. Only a small number of them, however, will
work suitably for the M-16A1 and other automatic weapons. To work suc-
cessfully, they must produce a chamber pressure for which the cartridge
was designed to handle (50,000 to 55,000 psi (pounds per square inch))
and, at the same time, to burn its fuel slowly enough to stop burning when
the bullet leaves the barrel and to allow the automatic action to extract the
spent cartridge case and to chamber a new round.
Almost all the rifle powders will generate enough energy to produce the
correct chamber pressures common with today’s modern rifle cartridges,
but only a few of them will provide the correct time-pressure curves to
work an automatic action.
As an experiment, we can start off reloading five cartridges for the
M-16A1 with the fastest rifle powder by DuPont Chemical Company, the
IMR-4227, and to shoot them for a group downrange at 100 yards. IMR
means “Improved Military Rifle” powder.
Then, we can reload another five cartridges but, this time, for a slower
powder, the IMR-4198. Fire all five rounds at a target downrange at 100
yards, measure the group, and document it.
Reload another five cartridges with even a slower powder, this time the
IMR-3031. Do the same thing as with the last two loads.
Continue reloading five more cartridges with each the IMR-4894,
IMR-4064, IMR-4320, IMR-4350, and IMR-4831 powders.
A pattern will emerge almost immediately. Starting off with a load of
IMR-4227, as the firing pin strikes the primer, the gunpowder burns rap-
idly to produce a chamber pressure of between 50,000 and 55,000 psi; the
bullet goes through the barrel, but the powder burns so fast it stops burn-
ing before the bullet leaves the barrel. Because the time-pressure curve is
far too short for the requirement of the action to work correctly, in spite of
The Science of Interior Ballistics 9

TABLE 1.1 A Comparison Chart for Smokeless Gunpowders

Shotgun powders Rifle powders Pistol powders
(Fast) (Fast) (Fast)
Top Mark Unique Bullseye
450-LS SR-4756 N-1010
Gray-B 2400 Hi-Skor
AA-125 H-110 PB
Red Dot IMR-4227 230-P
N-2010 680 231
700-X N-200 Red Dot
160 RX-7 Top Mark
AA-205 103 630-P
Green Dot H-427 631
PB IMR-4198 Unique
Unique 748 SR-7625
162 N-204 HS-5
SR-7625 102 AL-5
HS-5 IMR-3031 SR-4756
N-2020 RX-11 HS-6
500-HS H-335 AL-8
AL-7 H-375 H-240
Herco H-BL-C (2) Herco
164 N-201 N-1020
SR-4756 H-4895 N-110
HS-6 N-203 2400
540-MS IMR-4895 H-4227
AL-8 IMR-4064 IMR-4227
(Slow) IMR-4320 IMR-4198
101 (Slow)
760
RX-21
H-414
IMR-4350
780
N-204
10 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

TABLE 1.1 (Continued)

Shotgun powders Rifle powders Pistol powders
100
H-450
H-4831
IMR-4831
N-205
H-570
(Slow)

the proper chamber pressure, it will fail to complete its cycle of extracting
the spent case or re-chambering a new one. Most likely, the bolt will not
even move more than a half an inch or so, making it necessary to manually
remove the spent cartridge from the receiver.
With a load of IMR-4198, the bolt will move a little further than with
the IMR-4227, being a little slower in its burning rate characteristics; the
cartridge case may move approximately halfway through the port before
jamming the action. It will not leave the receiver, nor, again, will the action
complete its full cycle of extraction of the spent cartridge case or re-cham-
bering a new round. Groups downrange will be a little smaller than with
the IMR-4227 but, still, unsatisfactory.
This time, however, with a load of IMR-3031, the burning rate char-
acteristics will correspond precisely with the correct time-pressure curve
to allow the action to operate a full cycle of extraction of the spent car-
tridge case and to re-chamber a new round. Groups downrange will be
the smallest of the three loads and typically less than one inch in diameter
at 100 yards. With 25.5 grains of IMR-3031 with a 52 grain spitzer boat-
tail bullet, the muzzle velocity at approximately between 3,100 and 3.250
fps (feet per second), the powder, bullet, cartridge case length and neck
diameter and thickness, chamber pressure, and time-pressure curve will
be precisely correct for the need of the action to operate correctly (Figures
1.2 and 1.3).
As we continue to advance beyond IMR-3031 to IMR-4895, upon fir-
ing the round, the bolt moves much more slowly and may travel back-
wards about two-thirds from the breach before it stops, leaving the spent
cartridge case in the receiver with the automatic action unable to move
The Science of Interior Ballistics 11

FIGURE 1.2 A typical appearance of black powder.

FIGURE 1.3 Extruded gun-powder into cylinders similar to the DuPont’s IMR series
is shown above with different shapes, diameters, and lengths to control the burning rate
characteristics and time-pressure curves with additive mixtures to reduce flash, flame
temperatures, smoke, leftover residue in the receiver and the barrel and sensitivity to the
change in ambient temperature. Gunpowders can also be small spherical balls or flakes,
depending on the manufacturer and application.

any further. The burning rate characteristics and time-pressure curve are
no longer in time for the action to work correctly.
As we progress to IMR-4064, IMR-4320, IMR-4350 and, finally, to
IMR-4831, we will find each successive powder to burn more slowly caus-
ing the action to work more sluggishly until it fails to move the action
entirely, an event when no longer possible to stuff enough powder into the
cartridge case to produce enough chamber pressure to operate the action.
12 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

As we progress from the fastest powder IMR-4227 to the slowest powder

IMR-4831, the pattern is easy to perceive and recognize. Although IMR-4227
can produce enough chamber pressure, the time-pressure curve (burning too
fast) is simply too fast to allow the operation of the action to complete its
full cycle of retraction, ejection, and re-chamber of a new round. When we
approach the correct powder, however, a powder capable of producing the
correct chamber pressure and time-pressure curve for that action, the IMR-
3031 (or H-335 and others), the action is fast, efficient, and smooth. As we
get away from that correct powder, to slower powders, the action becomes
more and more jerky and sluggish until there is no movement whatsoever.
Again, as we approach the correct powder (or powders), the groups
downrange gets smaller and smaller until it reaches the design limitations
of the gun system and, as we leave the correct powder, the groups down-
range gets bigger and bigger.
Our conclusion is obvious: to be successful, for a given gun system,
whether a revolver, rifle, shotgun, or automatic, we have to load ammuni-
tion with the correct powder that will produce the correct chamber pres-
sure for the cartridge with the correct time-pressure curve for optimum
results. Of course, we have other requirements as well. For consistency,
from shot-to-shot, every cartridge case must be as identical to each other
as technically possible in diameter, thickness, and length (particularly the
thickness and length of the neck), the base of the bullet as round as techni-
cally possible, the powder in each cartridge case as identical in its chemi-
cal makeup as technically possible, the primers for each case as uniform
as the manufacturing process allows, the correct rate of twist in the barrel
for the bullet diameter and velocity and, most importantly, the quality of
the firearm itself. It must be first class.
Figure 1.4 is a typical characteristic curve to show the relationship
between time and pressure (the time-pressure curve). “X” represents the
point where the bullet leaves the barrel at the precise moment the powder
stops burning (see Figure 1.5).

1.3 TIMING IS EVERYTHING

It is important for us to “time” the time-pressure curve (Figure 1.4) and

burning rate characteristics of the gunpowder to correspond with the
The Science of Interior Ballistics 13

FIGURE 1.4 The time-pressure curve.

FIGURE 1.5 “X” represents the point where the bullet leaves the barrel at the precise
moment the powder stops burning.

length of the barrel and velocity of the bullet. At the precise moment the
bullet leaves the barrel, the powder ought to have finished burning (X).
If the powder continues to burn after the bullet leaves the barrel, however,
or stops burning before it leaves the barrel, we will have experienced a
noticeable loss of efficiency with a corresponding increase in the size of
the groups downrange.
We can note, when shooting in the wintertime with snow on the ground, if
the powder continues to burn after the bullet leaves the barrel, we will find a
14 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

streak of unburned powder on the snow extending several feet beyond and in
front of the barrel. If the bullet is of a lead or a lead alloy, with lubricant, we
may also see a streak of unburned or unused lubricant on the snow as well.
The characteristic curve in Figure 1.5 easily tells us; as we get closer
and closer to the correct powder charge for a given barrel and bullet, the
groups get progressively smaller.

1.4 THE CORRECT RATIO TO THE REMAINING CASE CAPACITY

Experience with the ammunition industry and recreational shooters has

taught us the importance of filling up most of the remaining case capac-
ity (RCC) (the distance between the primer and the base of the bullet in
the cartridge case) with gunpowder in order to obtain the correct chamber
pressure the cartridge was designed to handle for the maximum veloc-
ity and operating efficiency. If it is a fast powder that does not fill up the
remaining case capacity for at least 87% to 90%, then the common prac-
tice among reloaders in the recreational community is to place fillers in
between the powder and the base of the bullet. That filler keeps the powder
from moving around in the case to provide a more uniform ignition from
shot-to-shot and a more consistent group downrange.
Ammunition manufactures, on the other hand, tend to use the powder
that will fill up most of the remaining case capacity for a given cartridge
and bullet and, at the same time, consistently produce the correct chamber
pressure the cartridge and gun was designed to handle.
Experiments have determined that moving the powder around inside of
the cartridge case, when moving the gun, will also affect the burning rate
characteristics and time-pressure curves from shot-to-shot, and that will
affect accuracy downrange.
Experienced reloaders as well as the ammunition industry have learned
to use the correct powder for a given cartridge and bullet combination
with the correct ratio between powder and the remaining case capacity, to
ensure consistency in chamber pressure, the burning rate characteristics
and time-pressure curve. Without uniformity and consistency, from load
to load, consistent accuracy is impossible (see Figure 1.6).
In Figure 1.7, we can easily see the effect of a constant ratio versus a
variable ratio of powder charge to the remaining case capacity.
The Science of Interior Ballistics 15

FIGURE 1.6 Consistent accuracy from load to load.

FIGURE 1.7 The effect of a constant ratio versus a variable ratio of powder charge to the
remaining case capacity.

It is impossible to maintain accuracy with a constantly changing ratio

of powder charge to the remaining case capacity. Then, in Figure 1.8, we
can see, as we approach the correct powder charge ratio for the remaining
case capacity, the groups’ downrange gets smaller and, as we deviate from
this correct ratio, the groups get bigger.
Likewise, starting from the fastest powder available and working
toward the slowest, for a given remaining case capacity and bullet weight,
16 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

FIGURE 1.8 The correct powder charge ratio for the remaining case capacity.

in Figure 1.9, the groups will progressively grow smaller as we approach

the correct powder (CP).
However, as we go beyond the CP, the groups will again progressively
grow larger until it becomes almost impossible to hit anything with reli-
ability and consistency (Figure 1.10).

FIGURE 1.9 The fastest powder available and working toward the slowest, for a given
remaining case capacity and bullet weight.
The Science of Interior Ballistics 17

FIGURE 1.10 The groups progressively grow larger until it becomes almost impossible
to hit anything with reliability and consistency.

Then, again, this same pattern holds true with automatic actions such as
the M-16 and all its derivatives (Figure 1.11), and every other automatic or
semi-automatic weapon. As we move from the fastest powder to the slowest
powder, the speed of the automatic actions vary with the speed of the powder.
As we start loading cartridges with the fastest powder, we will soon
learn that the powder burns so fast that the automatic actions will not oper-
ate; then, as we use a slower and slower powder, the actions begin to move
and finally to operate properly. As we approach the CP for a given action,

FIGURE 1.11 The same pattern of Figure 1.10 with automatic actions.
18 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

the action runs smoother and smoother with less and less jerkiness. When
we reach the CP, the action operates perfectly: fires, extracts, ejects, and
chambers a new cartridge in the correct sequence.
As we go beyond the CP with progressively slower powders, the action
begins to operate more and more sluggishly until it fails to operate entirely,
an event that occurs when there is not enough powder to produce the cor-
rect chamber pressure (Figure 1.12).
On the other hand, as we can see in Figure 1.13, as we move from the
fastest powder to the CP, to operate the action perfectly, accuracy progres-
sively improves until it corresponds with the CP.
When we go beyond that point, accuracy progressively decreases with
the increase in the sluggishness of the action.

1.5 RELOADING AMMUNITION FOR A PARTICULAR GUN

While we must maintain the CP and ratio of powder to the remaining case
capacity, in order to obtain the maximum accuracy potential, we will not
succeed unless we also stabilize the bullet with the correct muzzle velocity
and bullet relative to the rate of twist.
Two methods are available: (1) we can manipulate the powder charge
to control the muzzle velocity or (2) we can vary the weight of the bullet
to match the rate of twist (see Theory of Twist).

FIGURE 1.12 The approach of the correct powder results in the action to runs smoother
and smoother with less and less jerkiness.
The Science of Interior Ballistics 19

FIGURE 1.13 An event that occurs when there is not enough powder to produce the
correct chamber pressure.

To reload ammunition for a particular gun, whether handgun, rifle,

shotgun, machinegun, or submachinegun, we must take the following
decisions:
(1) application;
(2) remaining case capacity;
(3) bullet length; and
(4) the barrel’s rate of twist.
Application is the intention of use. How do we intend to use the gun?
For hunting, target practice, competition, self-defense? In close-quarters?
At great distances? Big-game hunting? Small-game hunting? Dangerous
game? Once we decide upon the application, we can easily select the muz-
zle velocity and bullet length (with the accompanying felt recoil and recoil
jump).
Bullet weight determines the length of the bullet for a given diameter
(caliber), which determines the remaining case capacity in a given car-
tridge case. The rate of twist has already been determined by the gun’s
manufacturer and, with some exceptions, almost never is an option for
the buyer. It will almost always be wrong except for the original design
application (such as big-game hunting), particularly for handguns (such as
self-defense).
20 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

Because we can almost never have the option to vary the barrel’s rate
of twist in order to accommodate a particular cartridge and bullet length,
weight, and muzzle velocity, we will have to manipulate muzzle velocity
and bullet length, through its weight, to obtain the proper bullet spin for
the maximum accuracy potential downrange.
Most guns, with the important exception of military weapons – which
are always precisely designed for extreme reliability with a certain car-
tridge, bullet weight, gunpowder, and muzzle velocity – were designed
many years earlier for heavier bullets using gunpowders that may not
be available any longer. Many hunters prefer to select the bullet weight,
for their particular gun, that will produce the greatest muzzle velocity,
thinking of it as superior to heavier bullets that produce much less muzzle
velocity. That automatically relegates them to a lighter bullet, sometimes
the lightest bullet available on the market for any given cartridge and cali-
ber. Because the rate of twist may have been originally designed for the
heaviest bullet, or a much heavier bullet, there will always be a certain
incompatibility with a built-in inaccuracy when using a different weight,
something most hunters and recreational shooters will not perceive or
understand until much later after greater experience. Lighter bullets, fired
out of the proper cartridge case at the correct chamber pressure, will most
definitely provide for a flatter trajectory but lose momentum and velocity
much faster than a heavier bullet, even if the heavier bullet starts off at a
substantially lower velocity.
With bullet manufacturers manufacturing bullets from light to heavy,
for a given caliber and cartridge, the reloader has an enormous advantage
over single users using ammunition from off the shelf at a local retailer.
He can reload ammunition with extreme precision for extreme accuracy
for his particular gun, ordinarily not an option for anyone else using off
the shelf equipment.
When we place a given bullet in a cartridge case at its proper depth,
sometimes something we do arbitrarily on the basis of our perceived
physical attractiveness of the whole cartridge, it will automatically deter-
mine the amount of space between the primer and the base of the bullet to
provide for the remaining case capacity. That will determine the kind and
the amount of powder we can use to obtain the correct chamber pressure.
We have two methods of measuring the remaining case capacity:
The Science of Interior Ballistics 21

(1) The first method to accurately measure the remaining case capacity
is to put water into a spent cartridge case, with a spent primer still
inside, at the depth corresponding with the exact position of the
base of the bullet. Then, we weigh the water.
(2) The second method is to weigh the exact amount of powder we
intend to use at the same depth. This method, if we use it correctly,
with the CP, is much more accurate.
Once we know the remaining case capacity, we then calculate 87% of
it to give us the CP charge. Some powders require a slightly different ratio
of charge to the remaining case capacity; however, on the most part, 87%
is a fair estimate at the proper ratio.
After we determine the remaining case capacity, with any chosen bullet
weight, we must decide on the muzzle velocity we need to stabilize for the
rate of twist on the gun we have chosen to use.
When we finally select the CP and bullet length/weight and muzzle
velocity, it becomes imperative to test and then “tune” the ammunition for
the gun.

1.6 TESTING AND “TUNING”

The following two methods work very well:

(1) This first method is the best. We load a 5-shot group, with the cor-
rect components, with the powder filling up 87% of the remaining
case capacity; then working at even or uniform intervals (1/10, ½,
1, 2, 3, etc.), we load a series of 5-shot groups at these intervals
working toward 5% below and 5% above the 87% RCC. Some-
times, it may become necessary to go 10% below and 10% above
the 87% RCC, particularly with very slow burning powders in
large-capacity cartridge cases.
Through a pair of chronographic screens, we fire each 5-shot
group to electronically measure the velocity of each round. Then
we calculate the average velocity, the medium velocity, the extreme
spread (difference between the lowest and the highest velocities),
and the standard deviation, the most important indication of both
22 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

accuracy and performance of ammunition and gun. The 5-shot

group with the lowest standard deviation will be the most impor-
tant clue to its accuracy, and hopefully somewhere between 2 and
6 fps for handguns with small remaining case capacity and fast
powders and 20 and 30 fps for rifles with large remaining case
capacities and much slower powders.
Of course, if the average velocity is nowhere near the velocity
compatible for the rate of twist, we will have to either increase or
decrease the powder charge or change the powder type entirely to
something either slightly faster or slower in its burning rate char-
acteristics. Usually, a low standard deviation will correspond with
the correct muzzle velocity at the given rate of twist. It will also
prove that each important variable responsible for accuracy and
consistency is under control and the gun works correctly.
(2) In the second, less effective method to test and tune our ammuni-
tion for a given gun, instead of a pair of chronographic screens,
which is very expensive for many people, we simply shoot at
a paper target for the smallest groups; measure the size of each
5-shot group; calculate the average velocity, the medium velocity,
the extreme spreads, and finally their standard deviations.
Essentially, the problem with this second method is the intro-
duction of several variables, which is not a problem with the first
method: Namely, it is the psychological anticipation of felt recoil
(flinching), ambient temperature from the muzzle of the gun to the
target downrange and a much less consistent sighting picture.

1.7 FURTHER REFINEMENT

Unless our ammunition performs with a standard deviation to our satisfac-

tion, it will become necessary to “tune” it up for further refinement.
At this point, a whole array of possible problems and their accompany-
ing solutions may pop up in full view of the serious shooter.
We can “tune” the cartridge neck for greater uniformity in round-
ness, thickness, and length. Every time we shoot a gun, the cartridge
case expands and then contracts by perhaps 2,000th to 3,000th of an inch,
The Science of Interior Ballistics 23

sometimes less and sometimes more, depending on the interior dimen-

sions of the chamber. It is always a little larger in diameter after we fire it
and then that requires we re-size it before reloading it again. There are spe-
cial re-sizing dies just for that purpose. Each cartridge case progressively
enlarges in length until, eventually, it cracks from fatigue. This crack can
occur anywhere on the cartridge case, from somewhere near the rim, in
the middle of the case, or on the neck itself. If we fail to recognize this
fatigue and subsequent crack, that particular round will destroy the group
downrange.
With the proper tools, most of them readily available in gun shops
and online, we can ream the interior of the neck for uniformity and then
mill the exterior of the neck to ensure uniformity in both diameter and
thickness. Then, with another tool, we can trim the length of the neck for
uniformity in length. That is important. If the length of the cartridge case
varies, from case to case, by as much as a few thousandths of an inch, it
will undoubtedly adversely affect the groups downrange, particularly with
handgun cases.
Just as importantly, the depth and diameter of the hole in the base of the
cartridge case, to accommodate the primer, changes constantly with each
shot. For uniformity, we must also ream this primer hole before we reload
the cartridge for the next shot.
In addition, drilling the primer flash holes with an ordinary drill bit
does the same thing by making each flash hole uniformly round in diam-
eter. That tool is also readily available on the market, in gun shops, hard-
ware stores, and, of course, online.
Trimming the cartridge cases, particularly handgun cartridge cases,
always significantly improves accuracy. Back in the summer of 1976, we
observed a 57% improvement in accuracy with .44 Magnum cartridges
and a Smith & Wesson M-29 revolver. We consistently got groups small
enough at 100 yards, in a standing double-hand hold, to hit (empty) beer
cans without difficulty. Do not do it with real beer in the cans. Some of the
shooters might get very angry with you.
Apparently, handgun cartridges with fast powders are much more sen-
sitive to uneven lengths than rifle cartridges using much slower powders.
These improvements occur as a direct result of a greater uniformity in
the time-pressure curve of the powder from cartridge to cartridge. When
24 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

the powder burns more uniformly, shot after shot, we will always find
a smaller variation in muzzle velocity and, therefore, a smaller standard
deviation and tighter group.
In a revolver, as an example, it becomes important to make each cham-
ber in the cylinder as uniform in size, roundness and true to the center of
the bore as technologically possible.
Burrs in a barrel’s rifling can make the time-pressure curve of each
successive shot vary significantly as lead successively builds up and suc-
cessively increases resistance to the bullet as it travels through the bore.
Each successive shot will then adversely affect standard deviation and,
of course, the accuracy downrange. Burrs and lead build-up on the sides
of the lands of the rifling destroys the “timing” of the bullet as it trav-
els through the bore causing the powder to stop burning before the bullet
leaves the barrel. Remember! Proper timing requires the bullet to leave the
barrel at the precise moment the powder stops burning. If it should stop
burning before the bullet leaves the barrel, or continues to burn after the
bullet leaves the barrel, or, if it should vary in this interior ballistic behav-
ior, from shot to shot, or progressively deteriorates as the lead builds up in
the rifling from burrs, with the bore getting dirtier and dirtier, except for
very big targets at very small distances, hitting anything is only by chance.
Shooting for groups is nearly impossible.
One of the most effective solutions to this common problem, when
shooting lead alloy bullets, is to lap the bore with a good quality lapping
compound. They are readily available in the market just about anywhere.
CHAPTER 2

A PRACTICAL APPLICATION TO
SCIENTIFIC EXPERIMENTATION

CONTENTS

2.1 Introduction .................................................................................... 25

2.2 Identification of Our Ballistic Needs ............................................. 26
2.3 Seeking Out a Solution .................................................................. 28
2.4 Options ........................................................................................... 29
2.5 Commencement of an Experiment................................................. 31
2.6 Patterns and Relationships ............................................................. 32
2.7 Example ......................................................................................... 34
2.8 Some Suggestions .......................................................................... 37
2.9 Conclusion ..................................................................................... 40

2.1 INTRODUCTION

There is in the total body of science a philosophy of science and a science

of experimentation.
Though any acutely intelligent reader of this scientific text on ballis-
tics can easily perceive its philosophy or, more appropriately, the set of
attitudes guiding and governing the writer’s methods of scientific research
and database development, it is clearly beyond his scope to write from a
philosophical viewpoint.
Nevertheless, we have an urgent need to elaborate on the practical
methods of scientific experimentation for the recreational shooter who
26 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

lacks the monetary resources to organize and maintain a comprehensive

scientific laboratory. With that limitation in mind, we can still develop a
more humble laboratory for the purpose of valid scientific research and
development.
Let us start with a common problem each of us in the American shoot-
ing community can easily understand immediately and without any real
effort.

2.2 IDENTIFICATION OF OUR BALLISTIC NEEDS

Suppose we were to purchase a new Smith & Wesson Model 29.44 Mag-
num revolver with a 4-inch barrel. After honing and stoning the trigger
assembly for a smooth, crisp, and reliable action, we are now ready to
examine the gun ballistically.
The barrel’s rate of twist is a fast 1 in 18¾ inches. It means the bullet
spins through the bore at a rate of one revolution every 18¾ inches.
A typical bullet for the .44 Magnum has an outside diameter of approx-
imately 0.429 inches after going through a re-sizing die; a length of 0.75
inches and a weight of 240 grains (7,000 grains per pound).
If we were to refer to the section on the Theory of Twist, we will find
an equation to calculate the best muzzle velocity (BMV) for this bullet and
the proper rate of twist in order to properly stabilize this 240 grain bullet.
However, with this typical bullet and the gun’s rate of twist, the BMV
is extremely low at 835 fps. Obviously, we are either shooting the wrong
bullet, at the wrong muzzle velocity – 1100 to 1300 fps commonly with
off-the-shelf ammunition (depending on the length of the barrel and the
powder type) – or the gun manufacturers use the wrong rate of twist in
this caliber. Actually, with that particular bullet with that stated rate of
twist, it would be more appropriate for the .44 Special cartridges instead
of the .44 Magnum. Nevertheless, we can use that .44 Special load very
effectively in this .44 Magnum revolver using either the .44 Special or .44
Magnum cartridges (as long as we use fillers). Without an exaggeration,
such a load will allow sufficient accuracy, shot after shot, to consistently
hit Budweiser beer cans at 100 yards with a standing, double-hand hold.
Make sure they are empty Budweiser beer cans!
A Practical Application to Scientific Experimentation 27

Referring back to the Theory of Twist, we can calculate the best bul-
let length (BBL) for a 1 in 18.75 inch rate of twist at – say, 1200 fps. But
we will run into another problem. Even at a lower muzzle velocity of
1150 fps, the correct bullet length becomes 1.03 inches with a weight in
excess of 300 grains. If we were to drop down to 1100 fps, we can keep
the bullet’s length to less than 1 inch, or 0.988 inches, to fit the cartridge
into the chamber and cylinder. Even so, we will continue to have serious
problems. Gunpowders commercially available to us for this caliber and
the remaining case capacity were not designed to handle a bullet weight
in excess of 300 grains at this range of 1100-1200 fps in a revolver. True,
we can achieve such velocities for compatibility to the rate of twist; how-
ever, felt-recoil would be most unpleasant and only suitable for serious
big-game hunting or long-distance silhouette shooting. Again, as long as
we are willing to accept the punishing recoil and can avoid flinching,
accuracy will allow us to hit the same (empty) Budweiser beer cans as
with the lighter loads and lighter bullets, and if we can re-design the grip
to fit our hand more ergonomically to human-factor engineer a reduction
in felt-recoil.
Threshold of pain from felt-recoil is around 10 ft/lbs of kinetic
energy with 4 to 8 ft/lbs quite pleasant, as with the M-16, and anything
above 30 ft/lb – very painful. As a reference: a .50 caliber machinegun
can easily produce in excess of 90 ft/lbs of felt-recoil and a .30/06 more
than 30 ft/lbs.
Use of these slow-burning powders will prove burdensome, too. In
some instances, we could never stuff enough powder into the cartridge
cases to obtain the correct chamber pressure and muzzle velocity. In
other instances, some fast-burning powders can prove dangerous to use.
Finding a compromise is the real challenge. Remember! We must find
a powder to fill up between 87% and 93% of the remaining case capac-
ity – and, at the same time – produce the proper chamber pressure and
muzzle velocity to stabilize with the rate of twist and burn with the cor-
rect timing.
The time-pressure curve must correspond with the velocity of the bullet
traveling through the bore. As the bullet leaves the barrel, the powder must
stop burning. If not, we will not obtain the maximum ballistic efficiency
28 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

and accuracy downrange and, of course, within the design limitations of

the gun. Just as importantly, if not more so, if the time-pressure curve
varies with the velocity of the bullet traveling through the bore to exit the
barrel, we will find big groups downrange, extreme velocity spreads, and
large standard deviations (SDs). Accuracy is a lost cause. So, what is the
solution?

2.3 SEEKING OUT A SOLUTION

Basically, our solution is one of two extremes:

(1) We can go to the big bullet at the high velocities and fool around
with the problems of proper gunpowder selection and “timing,” or
(2) We can go to the opposite extreme of selecting a fast-burning
powder with the use of a standard 240 grain bullet and a filler to
ballistically simulate the effects and characteristics of a slower
powder.
Both solutions have their advantages and, of course, disadvantages. If
we were to use the 240-grain bullet, we must stick with a muzzle veloc-
ity of around 835 fps to stabilize it properly, which makes the load into
a short-range target and plinking round (and an excellent round for self-
defense).
If we were to aim for the 300 grain bullet, at a proper muzzle velocity
to stabilize with that given rate of twist, we must expect and accept the
prospects of very uncomfortable recoil and recoil jump. Flinching would
be very difficult to avoid for most of us.
However, the heavier bullet will have the advantage of extreme accu-
racy out to 200–250 yards for big-game hunting (if we don’t flinch) and the
lighter bullet a maximum effective range of between 150 and 175 yards.
Groups fall apart at 200 yards for the lighter bullet and at 275 yards for
the heavier bullet.
Let us take a moment to make it clear this little dissertation or study
on the .44 Magnum revolvers and the two different bullet weights, with
their two extremes, represents the same patterns and relationships with
A Practical Application to Scientific Experimentation 29

every gun regardless of the caliber or the cartridge. We will always have
the same problems of designing a load for every gun, cartridge, bullet, and
rate of twist.

2.4 OPTIONS

Suppose we decide to stay with the typical and readily available 240-grain
bullet. What are our options concerning powders? Actually, every pow-
der on the commercial market today will represent some kind of problem
with this 240-grain bullet at 835 fps, as with any other cartridge. Even
the slowest-burning pistol powders would burn too fast for our purpose.
Even use of some of the fast-burning rifle powders would give us ignition
problems, and occasionally, bullets may lodge inside the bore when the
powder fails to ignite and burn entirely. These rifle powders were clearly
not designed for short barrel pistols with pistol primers and small remain-
ing case capacities. They were designed for small capacity rifle cartridges
with rifle primers.
Fast-burning pistol powders would, as we would expect, easily give us
the correct muzzle velocity but will burn too quickly and fill up less than
one-half of the remaining case capacity for the proper chamber pressure.
They will also burn out of time. While some powders will burn entirely
before the bullet leaves the cylinder, in the case of a revolver, others may
complete the full burning cycle with the bullet halfway through the bore.
Then again, with fast-burning powders, we can use fillers to alter the
time-pressure curve, burning rate characteristics, and hence the “timing”
to make them behave as if they were slow-burning powders. If we do it
correctly, the fast-burning powders – instead of at the end of the cylinder
or in the middle of the bore – will stop burning at the end of the barrel, the
way it should be.
To obtain the correct combination of powder and filler, we will need to
experiment with a safe powder, such as Red Dot, basically a shotgun pow-
der mid-range in its burning characteristics between the fastest pistol pow-
der, Bullseye, and HS-5, a powder in between Bullseye and IMR-4198,
the slowest pistol powder (see Figure 2.1). So, Red Dot is one quarter up
30 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

FIGURE 2.1

the scale. With the proper filler, we can make Red Dot behave as if it were
halfway or more up the scale, as is true with any other powder with the
right filler.
We can use anything from toilet paper to Oatmeal to Corn Cob as fill-
ers. Certain fillers are obviously better than others.
Oatmeal works well as long as we do not have to meter it through a
powder measuring device, or in a progressive reloading press, due to its
irregular shapes and sizes, everything from extreme big flakes to extreme
small flakes.
Corn meal actually noticeably increases the muzzle velocity and felt-
recoil but, unfortunately, meters poorly. It tends to adhere to the metering
machinery and frequently clogs the drop tubes to produce extreme varia-
tions from cartridge to cartridge.
Corn cob, due to its irregular shapes and sizes, will not meter well,
either, unlike most ball powders, but meters much better than most other
fillers. When it burns, it produces a unique odor of sweet cider; possibly,
if someone were to do enough shooting with it, he could very well get a
little “high” if the wind blows it back in his face every time he fires a shot.
Corn cob softens the felt-recoil and dampens the report. Corn meal stiffens
it and amplifies the report.
On the other hand, other fillers have no apparent effect over felt-recoil
but always improve the ballistic efficiency of the ammunition, meaning a
more consistent accuracy downrange from shot to shot. They seem to work
by controlling the uniformity of the powder’s burning rate characteristics
A Practical Application to Scientific Experimentation 31

and time-pressure curve. We also have commercially available fillers that

do very well.

2.5 COMMENCEMENT OF AN EXPERIMENT

To start this experiment, we need to identify the exact amount of Red Dot
it takes to produce a muzzle velocity of 835 fps without fillers.
On this particular day of July 4, 1986, 5.2 grains of Red Dot with a typical
240 grain bullet produced an average muzzle velocity of 841 fps, a figure
very close to the 835 fps we require. Actually, as long as we are within plus
or minus 50 fps, we are well within the “ball park.”
Now, at this moment in time, we must stop long enough to explain
the use of certain statistical data points, particularly SD. Some of our
members of the shooting community and Academia, knowledgeable in
the science of statistics, may question the validity of using SD in a dis-
tribution of five scores (five shots with five different velocity readings).
They may retort that such a small distribution of scores in a statistical
analysis to determine the central tendency (average muzzle velocity) of
a distribution of scores and its SD has no real statistical value. In that
context, they are absolutely correct. However, our purpose in the use of
these statistical tools is not to establish a definitive analysis of the central
tendency and SD, but to identify the patterns and relationships between
a certain amount of powder to muzzle velocity to the bullet with a given
the rate of twist.
Though certainly definitive, the central tendency and SD of – say, 100
or even 1,000 shots – would have very, very little value to the real world of
shooting outdoors with a constantly changing environmental condition (see,
The Field-Effect Theory and the Effect of Field-Effect Over Trajectory).
It would be a hopeless cause to expect anything to the contrary. Unless
we intend to work out the mathematical relationships to a higher level or
to establish an engineering database for engineering applications, we will
waste a lot of ammunition. Except for mistakes in testing procedures, the
patterns and relationships will stay the same, whether in a distribution of
five scores or 1,000 scores. Only the data points change to either increase
or decrease accuracy, or sometimes, to clarify or bring out patterns and
32 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

relationships a small distribution of scores will not obtain ordinarily. In

this context, we do not need or desire such extreme accuracy but only to
identify the patterns and relationships that will allow us to “tune” up a load
for a particular gun with a particular rate of twist.

2.6 PATTERNS AND RELATIONSHIPS

When we study the results of Groups I–VI, patterns and relationships

become readily apparent (Table 2.1). As we approach the correct muzzle
velocity for the rate of twist, ballistic efficiency increases.

TABLE 2.1
Group I Group IV
4.8 5.1
1. 552 Lo=551 1. 743 Lo=743
2. 551 Hi=589 2. 758 Hi=758
3. 565 Av=565 3. 756 Av=750
4. 589 ES=38 4. 751 ES=15
5. 557 SD=16 5. 756 SD=10
Group II Group V
4.9 5.2
1. 562 Lo=561 1. 835 Lo=819
2. 564 Hi=589 2. 855 Hi=855
3. 561 Av=570 3. 855 Av=841
4. 589 ES=28 4. 855 ES=36
5. 570 Sd=15 5. 819 Sd=17
Group III Group VI
5.0 5.3
1. 652 Lo=635 1. 917 Lo=895
2. 651 Hi=663 2. 916 Hi=935
3. 662 Av=652 3. 935 Av=919
4. 663 ES=28 4. 933 ES=40
5. 635 Sd=11 5. 895 Sd=16
A Practical Application to Scientific Experimentation 33

In Group I, the extreme spread was 38 fps; however, as we approach

the correct muzzle velocity, the extreme spread successively decreases and
then successively increases when we surpass the correct muzzle velocity.
Likewise, as we approach the correct muzzle velocity, SD successively
decreases and then successively increases when we surpass the correct
muzzle velocity.
All cases in these groups were un-crimped; though not definitive, there
is another pattern. In five of the six groups (87.5%), the last shot is low,
and in three of the six groups (50%), the last shot represents the lowest
velocity in the group. Without further statistical analysis, what does these
data suggest? (Figure 2.2).
It may suggest, without our crimping the cases, each shot in the revolver
causes the bullet in each cartridge to move forward incrementally. Because
the last cartridge is the last shot, each preceding shot may have caused a
cumulative effect of the bullet protruding more than the others. Our expe-
rience will soon teach us, even without the assistance of an electronic
chronograph, when we fire heavy or relatively heavy loads in a revolver
without first crimping the cases, as the bullets move incrementally forward
due to recoil from the preceding shots, the subsequent recoil softens and
the report takes a successively softer sharpness with a successively lower
range of audio frequencies and set of harmonics. Experience will teach
us that this is also true with rifles and shotguns (excluding single-shot
guns, of course). These statistical data also suggest a successive decrease
Standard Deviation

Approaching Correct MV Surpassing

FIGURE 2.2
34 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

in muzzle velocity, which certainly corresponds with the above experi-

ences. Recoil corresponds with muzzle velocity.
Then, most interestingly, the highest velocity is not the first shot, as we
would expect logically, but either the third or fourth shot with one excep-
tion. In Group IV, the highest velocity was the second shot. Why? We
would need to perform a series of exhaustive experiments to determine the
cause of this interesting phenomenon. When we do not crimp the cases, it
seems logical to assume all subsequent shots to be a lower velocity then
the preceding shots, with the first shot the highest velocity and the last shot
the lowest velocity. On the basis of our experience, we have discovered
that, in spite of the high precision in the manufacture of cartridge cases
throughout the world, the dimensional characteristics – length, inside and
outside diameter, thickness, and metallurgy – always slightly vary from
cartridge case to cartridge case. Even with a difference of 2,000th of an
inch in any of the dimensions, it affects the performance of the round. The
variation in the crimp always affects this performance, too and, when there
is a metallurgical flaw in the cartridge case, such as when the case cracks
upon firing it for the first time, the end results proves catastrophic. That
proves very dramatic when we fire a group of five rounds and the crack
causes that particular round to significantly head off from the center of the
group downrange.
Also, as we shoot these loads at targets downrange, without first crimp-
ing them, we will find a pattern of the groups enlarging with each succes-
sive shot. When we properly and uniformly crimp the cases, there is no
such pattern.

2.7 EXAMPLE

In early September of that same year, using the same bullet, primer, car-
tridge case, and lubricant, we re-tested Group VI with 5.3 grains of Red
Dot. This time, though, the temperature was nearly 30°F lower than the
preceding one on July 4, 1986. Cases were crimped.
Notice the difference in average muzzle velocity of 188 fps between
the two groups. The only significant change in this test was the ambient
A Practical Application to Scientific Experimentation 35

TABLE 2.2
Group VI (re-test)
Early September
1. 742 Lo=701
2. 730 Hi=752
3. 732 Av=731
4. 701 ES= 51
5. 741. Sd = 19

temperature. Otherwise, the loads were identical. Notice, also, there is a

different pattern than the original Group VI (Table 2.2). The first shot is
the highest velocity and the last shot next to the highest. We no longer
have the same pattern of the muzzle velocity successively dropping as the
bullet moves out of its case with each successive shot. With the excep-
tion of the fourth shot, each shot is about the same as the others with no
distinctive pattern popping into view. We only need to improve the quality
of the ammunition to drop the extreme spread and SD for better accuracy.
Certainly, if we were to perform a more definitive statistical analysis of
this group, we might very well find new patterns and relationships. Who
knows?
Now, to improve the ballistic efficiency of the powder, what would
happen if we were to use a corn cob filler to fill up the remaining case
capacity following the gunpowder? With 5.3 grains of Red Dot in this
cartridge case, there is substantially less than 87% of the remaining case
capacity. We will need the filler to improve efficiency to keep the powder
in one place of the cartridge case between the primer and the base of the
bullet.
These tests in Table 2.3 were performed late in the afternoon after a
significant drop in temperature, which may account for the insignificant
increase in muzzle velocity relative to the re-test of Group VI. As a rule,
corn cob filler will increase muzzle velocity by an average of 50 fps.
36 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

TABLE 2.3
Group VII Group IX
5.3 5.3
1. 766 Lo=738 1. 769 Lo=729
2. 767 Hi=767 2. 749 Hi=769
3. 761 Av=756 3. 729 Av=755
4. 750 ES= 29 4. 766 ES= 40
5. 738 Sd= 12 5. 764 Sd= 16
Group VIII Group X
5.3 5.3
1. 736 Lo=736 1. 730 Lo=730
2. 770 Hi=770 2. 746 Hi=807
3. 743 Av=751 3. 747 Av=755
4. 740 ES= 34 4. 746 ES= 77
5. 767 Sd= 16 5. 807 Sd= 29

Ordinarily, as we can see, Group VIII through Group X is extremely

good. Average muzzle velocities vary from a low of 751 fps to a high of
756 fps – an extreme spread of 5 fps. When we shot these same loads at
150 yards, we got a group of about the diameter of a man’s face (shooting
in a standing, double-hand hold). At 100 yards, we were hitting bowling
pins almost consistently (using the same hold). Then, at 200 yards, we
were unable to hit a 12-foot high bank consistently.
Even though the medium muzzle velocity was 82 fps away from our
objective of 835 fps, accuracy was extremely good. Perhaps, if we were
to add another 1/10 of a grain of Red Dot to 5.4 grains, we might obtain
this objective.
Incidentally, a magnum pistol primer will increase muzzle velocity by
approximately 10 fps with this load, and possibly even more with slow-
burning rifle powders. Changing the filler from corn cob to corn meal will
increase muzzle velocity by another 50 fps, roughly.
Increasing the barrel’s length will produce an average increase in muz-
zle velocity of about another 10–30 fps for every inch. It depends on the
powder, primer, and filler as well as the ambient temperature.
A Practical Application to Scientific Experimentation 37

Slower burning powders will increase muzzle velocity more dramati-

cally with each incremental increase of barrel length than the fastest pow-
ders, which will usually stop burning long before the bullet leaves the
barrel when we go beyond the correct barrel length.
Two or three grains of black powder or Pyrodex in front of the primer
and in between the primer and a slower burning pistol powder, as well
as a slow-burning rifle powder in a handgun cartridge, or large-capacity
rifle cartridges with very slow-burning rifle powders, may have the same
effect as a magnum primer. It works by increasing the ignition tempera-
ture and shortens the time-pressure curve, which in turn changes the
“timing.”
With the exception of an increase in muzzle velocity, it does not seem
to have any advantage except, possibly, for extremely cold temperatures,
very slow-burning powders or very short barrels with powders burning
too slow for the length of the barrel. Do not overlook the physical danger,
either. To be competent, the reloader would have to start off his experi-
ments with one or two grains of black powder or Pyrodex, while using
a constant charge of a smokeless powder, and incrementally work up his
load at 1.0 grain intervals until he finds the correct combination, a combi-
nation that must correspond with the correct muzzle velocity, timing, and
rate of twist.
While, on the other hand, a few grains of black powder or Pyrodex
(with others in the market) between the primer and a relatively slow-burn-
ing powder may not only increase the ignition temperature and shorten
the time-pressure curve but make the powder behave as if it were a much
faster powder. It allows for a higher muzzle velocity, in a small remaining
case capacity, with very slow pistol or very fast-burning rifle powders that
are ordinarily not really suitable for this application.

2.8 SOME SUGGESTIONS

Going back to Groups VII to X of Table 2.3, it is obvious, if we want to

drop the size of the groups from the size of a man’s face to – say, a man’s
nose – we will need to do some work to improve the ballistic uniformity
of the ammunition. Ballistic efficiency is of course extremely important.
38 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

Ballistic uniformity is more important, moreover. Without both efficiency

and uniformity, however, we cannot seriously expect to consistently hit
our targets. Grouping is everything!
To help the reloader, we offer the following advice when using a
revolver. Needless to say, most of this advice would apply to any kind of
firearm, not just handguns or revolvers. We are using a revolver to exem-
plify the kind of work and experimentation we would need to carry out in
order to “tune up” a gun. With some important exceptions, these exem-
plications and experimentations apply to almost any gun. If it does not
have a cylinder or is a single-shot affair, then we can discount some of the
following advice, obviously. On the most part, the following advice would
apply to nearly every gun.
• Perhaps the revolver’s cylinder may need smoother and rounder
chambers with a closer tolerance in respect to each other? If one
chamber is one or two thousands of an inch off the other chambers, it
is imperative to know that and then to isolate it from the other cylin-
ders. Some serious shooters shooting with revolvers in competition
have been known to take their cylinders to a jeweler to engrave a
number for each chamber on the extractor in order to keep track of
the individual performance characteristics of each chamber. Others
simply go to the manufacturer to purchase a better cylinder.
• Check the cylinder’s center for trueness. If it is off center, each
chamber will possess its own personality in respect to the barrel and
forcing cone. Each bullet from each chamber will not enter into the
forcing force uniformly. Ballistic uniformity becomes impossible.
The only solution is to get a new and truer cylinder.
• Make sure the center of each chamber is true to the center of the
cylinder. If not, the only solution is to get a new cylinder.
• If the barrel accumulates lead in the bore at the correct muzzle veloc-
ity for the rate of twist and with the proper lubricant, there are prob-
ably burrs in the rifling. Lap the bore. Lapping compound is readily
available in the market.
• Measure the outside diameter of each bullet with a micrometer. Put
them into lots representing diameter. Use the same precise diameter
A Practical Application to Scientific Experimentation 39

in five or six shot lots for grouping purposes. This will provide supe-
rior results downrange, because every bullet will have precisely the
same outside diameter. Do the same thing for every caliber and gun.
• Make sure each bullet weighs the same and do the same thing, as
you did with diameter, by placing the same weights into lots for uni-
formity.
• After resizing the lead or jacketed bullets, if the bullets vary in diam-
eter by more than one to three thousands of an inch, as we rotate the
micrometer around the bullet for at least three separate readings, we
must either get a new die or do the same thing as above. Place them
into lots. This will greatly improve accuracy downrange. Remem-
ber! Uniformity!
• Check the base of each bullet. If unable to get perfect bases, with
the same diameter and roundness, if casting lead bullets, then get a
nose-fed bullet mold. If the bullet bases are not perfectly round, they
will not shoot accurately, either. The roundness of the bullet’s base
is probably the most important attribute of a bullet and will affect
accuracy more than any other bullet attribute.
• Check the cartridge cases. If they are not of the same brand and
lot number, they will not shoot uniformly if we were to mix them
together in a group. Every manufacturing brand and every lot of
every brand will have its own personality. Make sure, when shoot-
ing in groups for accuracy, we do not mix together different brands
and lots.
• Measure the length of each cartridge case. If any case in the same lot
of any manufacturing brand varies by as much as one thousands of
an inch, it will affect the nature or strength of the crimp and hence
the “timing” of the bullet traveling through the bore. Make its length
as close to each other as physically possible. As long as each case, in
a given lot, is the same as each other, the actual length is unimport-
ant. Strive for uniformity.
• Standardize reloading techniques and methods and stick to them.
A variation, however small, in reloading techniques will affect the
“timing” if it should occur while in the middle of a group or lot.
40 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

2.9 CONCLUSION

In this chapter, although we could have easily started off with other guns
and calibers, we decided to use a .44 Magnum Smith & Wesson Model
29 revolver instead as a representation of guns and the various ballistic
problems and methods of resolving them. With the right load, this gun and
caliber will shoot very accurately within its inherent design limitations,
the bullets’ maximum effective range and maximum range of lethality for
its weight and trajectory velocity.
When we began to examine the gun ballistically, we discovered the rate
of twist dictated a very slow muzzle velocity of 835 fps with the typical
240 grain bullet in sharp contrast to the ammunition commercially avail-
able on the market. Depending on the barrel’s length, those bullets will
usually leave the barrel in excess of 1,000 fps with flat soft nose-jacketed
bullets. Even with a cast lead-alloy bullet, the loads are designed for close
to 1,000 fps using gas checks on the base of the bullet to allow for those
velocities without excessively “leading” the bore.
The general public wants it that way and manufacturers will give them
what they want even if wrong.
As demonstrated in this text, those muzzle velocities with commer-
cial ammunition are simply too fast to be ballistically compatible with the
gun’s rate of twist. As stated before, regardless of the gun, rifle, or hand-
gun, with the exception of military weapons, the rates of twist are almost
always wrong with most bullets.
Military firearms are designed to use only one bullet weight and the
rate of twist selected for that weight; commercial firearms, on the other
hand, although designed in the same way, are used by the shooting com-
munity with different weights and lengths for the same cartridge.
It is usually necessary, if we want to obtain the optimum accuracy for a
particular gun, to reload our own ammunition, once we have calculated the
correct muzzle velocity for a given rate of twist and bullet length.
We decided to stay with the 240 grain cast lead-alloy bullet and use a
relatively fast-burning shotgun powder in an experiment to identify the
amount of Red Dot it would take to produce the correct muzzle velocity of
835 fps or close to it. We knew it would be almost impossible or at least
very difficult to consistently obtain that exact muzzle velocity, shot after
A Practical Application to Scientific Experimentation 41

shot. There are simply too many variables to control; that we demonstrated
in this text with our experiments.
As far as the decision to use Red Dot, with more than 100 gunpowders
available on the market, that decision required extensive experience with
both reloading ammunition and shooting guns, the kind of experience that
takes years to accumulate. It is an intuitive process – not analytical – and
also an intellectual process our brains develop over time to avoid another
slow exploratory procedure we needed to do originally, when we were
more naïve and less knowledgeable, in order to derive one of many correct
solutions in much less time and mental labor. It only has to be a correct
working solution, out of the many possible correct working solutions. It
does not have to be the only correct working solution, either, nor exclud-
ing possibly one of the better working solutions. It is just a solution that
works.
To improve the ballistic efficiency, we used corn cob as the filler to fill
up the remaining case capacity on top of the Red Dot. Corn cob increased
the muzzle velocity by approximately 50 fps, stretched out the time-pres-
sure, slowed the burning rate characteristics of the powder, and changed
the “timing” to more closely correspond with the length of the barrel.
In the real world, however, we discovered muzzle velocity changes
constantly with the constant change in air temperature. When the tem-
perature was a little over 90°F during a day of July 1986, the average
muzzle velocity was 841 fps with 5.2 grains of Red Dot and 8.5 grains of
corn cob. In the following September, with a much lower air temperature,
the same combination produced a drop in muzzle velocity by an average
of 88 fps.
When we re-tested the same load later in November of that year, with
the air temperature of 34°F, muzzle velocity dropped a total of 151 fps
from the July reading of 841 fps to a new average of 690 fps.
Clearly, we could not rely upon one particular load to maintain a con-
stant muzzle velocity throughout a year with seasonable temperature
changes, too. Group XI demonstrates the extreme variability in muzzle
velocity with temperature changes.
In Group XI of Table 2.4, with an outside air temperature of 34°F,
shooting a load of 5.2 grains of Red Dot without the filler, we obtained an
average muzzle velocity of 690 fps.
42 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

TABLE 2.4
Group XI Group XII
5.2 5.2
No filler Corn Cob filler
1. 677 Lo=677 1. 816 Lo=728
2. 682 Hi=714 2. 728 Hi=816
3. 701 Av=690 3. 730 Av=754
4. 714 ES=37 4. 740 ES=88
5. 680 Sd=16 5. 756 Sd=36
Group XIII Group XIV
5.2 5.4
Corn Meal filler No filler
1. 785 Lo=772 1. 727 Lo=684
2. 772 Hi=836 2. 716 Hi=733
3. 836 Av=797 3. 733 Av=717
4. 802 ES=64 4. 726 ES=49
5. 794 Sd=24 5. 684 Sd=19
Group XV Group XVI
5.4 5.4
Corn Cob filler Corn Meal filler
1. 792 Lo=769 1. 818 Lo=812
2. 806 Hi=806 2. 817 Hi=819
3. 784 Av=789 3. 819 Av=816
4. 769 ES=37 4. 814 ES=7
5. 796 Sd=13 5. 812 Sd=3

With the same load, but using corn cob filler, we increased muzzle
velocity by 64 fps to an average of 754 fps (see Group XII of Table 2.4).
Then, when we changed the filler to corn meal in Group XIII, we
increased muzzle velocity by another 43 fps to an average of 797 fps.
These two fillers clearly work to increase muzzle velocity in these
experiments.
Please take the time to observe Group XII more closely. Look at the
muzzle velocity of 754 fps, which had been obtained with an outside
A Practical Application to Scientific Experimentation 43

temperature of 34°F. Now compare this fact to the average muzzle veloc-
ity obtained in Groups VII to X of Table 2.3, the previous September with
an average outside temperature of 30–35°F – much higher. Without the
corn cob filler, the average muzzle velocities varied with the temperature
from July to November, an extreme variation from 90–94°F to a cold 34°F.
Yet, the same loads with corn cob filler maintained a constant medium
muzzle velocity of (actually) 753.5 fps.
What is the logical conclusion? The corn cob filler – possibly other
fillers as well – can maintain a constant muzzle velocity while temperature
changes from one extreme to another.
Notice, as a final observation in this chapter, we can find some interest-
ing performance characteristics in Group XVI. With a load of 5.4 grains of
Red Dot and corn meal filler, the extreme spread was 7 fps, an SD of 3 fps
(actually 2.6 fps) and an average muzzle velocity of 816 fps.
These experiments clearly demonstrate, though definitely not defini-
tive by any stretch of an imagination, that corn meal not only increases
muzzle velocity on an average of 100 fps in this cartridge and caliber,
but actually reduces the extreme spread (see Group X in Table 2.3),
improves the ballistic efficiency and uniformity, and, all the while, main-
tains a more constant muzzle velocity and with a variable temperature in
the real world.
CHAPTER 3

A THEORY OF THE ASYMPTOTIC

FUNCTION

CONTENTS

3.1 Introduction .................................................................................... 45

3.2 Theory ............................................................................................ 48
3.3 Application to Reality .................................................................... 51
3.4 Conclusion ..................................................................................... 52

“The word asymptote is derived from the Greek ἀσύμπτωτος (asumptōtos)

which means ‘not falling together.’ The term was introduced by Apollonius
of Perga in his work on conic sections, but in contrast to its modern mean-
ing, he used it to mean any line that does not intersect the given curve.”
—Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

3.1 INTRODUCTION

A long, long time ago, when mathematicians began to play with numbers,
they recognized even then the development of patterns and relationships
seemingly corresponding with their daily experiences of life and human
reality.
In some ages of the ancient past, mathematicians – perhaps as a cor-
ollary of their cultural environment – assigned magical or supernatural
46 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

values to numbers and, on occasion, killed and even murdered people to

protect themselves from the people outside trying to discover “truth and
knowledge” through numbers. Indeed, we even have documented accounts
of people committing suicide to protect them from revealing these magical
truths of numbers to people outside of their congregation.
So, over these long and eventful centuries, we have an equally long
history of interesting stories of either the establishment or destruction of
religious, pseudo-religious, and philosophical groups of people organized
within the framework of the magical or supernatural interpretations of the
patterns and relationships of numbers.
Even today, with our enormous knowledge databases and technologies,
we continue to assign magical values and special significances to numbers
and perhaps, too, within the framework of the folkways and mores of our
own cultural environments.
Without our getting into a religion of mathematics, some new or old
philosophy or perhaps a line of continuity on nonsense dating back to pre-
history, the serious and mature student of the science of ballistics must
eventually recognize the existence of patterns and relationships between
the arrangements of numbers to ballistic phenomena.
Let us take the theory of the asymptotic function as an example.
About approximately 39 years ago at Camp Curtis Guild in 1976, near
Boston, Massachusetts, we began to perceive an apparent relationship
between the arrangement of certain numbers to the temperature of a gun
barrel and its effect toward the accuracy of a bullet striking a target down-
range. We noticed the same relationships while performing experiments at
the Westfield Sportsmen Club in Westfield, Massachusetts, between 1978
and 1980.
As the barrel warmed from each successive shot, the groups down-
range became successively smaller until they had obtained their maximum
potential for accuracy for that particular gun and ammunition. At the same
time, the groups would move with the increase in barrel temperature from
the bottom right to the center of the target.
Through our intuitive powers, we thought we could perceive a relation-
ship between the severities of this climb to the center of the target to the
temperature of the barrel.
A Theory of the Asymptotic Function 47

When the temperature of the barrel was cold and well below 50°F, the
first shot was always low and, in our location above the equator, to the
right of center (see coriolis effect).
After each successive shot, as the barrel warmed and approached 70°F,
not only did the groups grow smaller as they climbed to the center of the
target, each successive shot produced a successively smaller increment of
climb. Each group and each increment of climb grew smaller and smaller
as the barrel became hotter and hotter.
Additionally, once the tendency to climb subsided and settled down to
the center of the target, as the barrel grew even hotter and exceeded 100°F,
the group placement shifted around the center until the barrel had reached
an even higher temperature. Then, at that point, the groups settled down
again.
Later, when the barrel became so hot, when ordinary gun lubricants
and solvents would vaporize to the touch, we could observe the same phe-
nomena of groups shifting relative to the target’s center before settling
down again as the barrel reached a new high temperature.
As each of us ought to know very well, or by now, the use of our intui-
tive powers can be dangerous, particularly when we must consider a long
history of people deriving conclusions and making decisions intuitively
within the context of their psychiatric issues and cultural biases. We can
look at Adolph Hitler, as an example of a man, who thought of himself
as a genius and was diagnosed as a paranoid psychotic. Some historians
describe him as an “evil genius.”
Nevertheless, his psychosis consistently distorted his perception of
reality to such a degree that the Ally commanders during WW II made
a conscious decision not to assassinate him out of fear that, if he were
killed, a more competent replacement commander would fight a better war
against them.
Nonetheless, intuition can be extremely useful for us if we were to use
it conscientiously. It can allow us to jump over enormous chunks of data,
sometimes even instantaneously, to obtain conclusions and insights when,
ordinarily, systems of analysis and logic would require years of methodi-
cal research to perform correctly.
48 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

3.2 THEORY

The asymptotic function in mathematics refers to a line extending from a

maximum value on a sheet of graph paper and moving to a successively
smaller value at each subsequent increment. However small each final
value may represent, it will never obtain a value of zero.
If we were to take any number, say “1,” and to divide it by another
number, say “x,” we would get a number smaller than “1.” Then, if we
were to allow “x” to grow progressively at each increment of computation,
we would get a characteristic curve similar to the above curve in Figure
3.1. We call this mathematical phenomenon the “Asymptotic Function.”

Z = 1/x (1)

Let’s work out an example in exhaustive detail. Convert the number

“1” to the number “200.” Let “x” represent temperature at increments of
10°F from 0°F to 510°F.
• 200 divided by “0” is “0.”
• 200 divided by “10” is “20.”
• 200 divided by “20” is “10,” etc.
When we finish our computations, we should get the results in the sec-
ond column of Table 3.1.
However, though we can barely perceive a pattern in the areas iden-
tified as Groups A, B, C, etc., we really need a further amplification to

FIGURE 3.1 The asymptotic function characteristic curve.

A Theory of the Asymptotic Function 49

TABLE 3.1 An Asymptotic Representation of Temperature

Temp. °F 200/T° U-L A Temp. °F 200/T° 200/T° U-L A
0° 0 0 0 260° .77 .03 6
10° 20 20 4000 270° .74 .03 6 Group F
20° 10 10 2000 280° .71 .02 6
30° 6.7 3.3 663 290° .69 .02 4
40° 5 1.7 340 300° .67 .02 4
50° 4 1.0 200 310° .65 .02 4
60° 3.3 .07 139 320° .63 .02 4
70° 2.9 .4 81 330° .61 .02 4
80° 2.5 .4 80 Group A 340° .59 .02 4 Group C
90° 2.2 .4 79 350° .57 .02 4
100° 2 .2 40 360° .56 .01 4
Group B
110° 1.8 .2 40 370° .54 .02 4
120° 1.7 .1 20 380° .53 .01 4
130° 1.5 .2 20 390° .51 .02 4
140° 1.4 .1 20 400° .50 .01 2
150° 1.3 .1 20 Group C 410° .49 .01 2
160° 1.25 .05 20 420° .48 .01 2
170° 1.2 .1 20 430° .47 .01 2
180° 1.1 .1 20 440° .46 .02 2
190° 1.05 .05 10 450° .44 .01 2 Group H
Group D
200° 1.0 .05 10 460° .43 .01 2
210° 0.95 .05 8 470° .43 .009 2
220° 0.91 .04 8 480° .42 .01 2
Group E
230° 0.87 .04 8 490° .41 .01 2
240° 0.83 .04 8 500° .40 .01 2
250° 0.80 .03 6 510° .40 .008 2

identify the real beginning and end of each pattern. We can obtain this
amplification with a simple manipulation. When we multiply the asymp-
tote in the second column by the difference between the preceding asymp-
tote (U) and the present asymptote (L), we obtain a clarification of these
patterns in the third column.
Still, there is confusion between the beginning and the end of each
pattern. So, again, we must perform yet another simple manipulation to
50 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

sharpen the distinction between the two. When we multiply the answer in
the third column by the temperature in the first column, we finally obtain
something meaningful in the fourth column.
Now, we can easily perceive and recognize each pattern identified in
Table 3.1 as Groups A through H.
Thus, the asymptotic representation of temperature (Æ) takes the fol-
lowing mathematical expression:

Æ = ( PN/T°)( U-L ) T° (2)

where Æ = the asymptotic representation of temperature, PN = the “prim-

ing number,” and, in this instance, represent 200 (see Table 3.1).
Actually, PN can represent any number, from 1 to infinity; however,
as we increase or decrease PN, we increase or decrease the distinction
between the patterns, as well as the size of the numbers and the number
of patterns. We must also “round off” each number to the nearest whole
number or we will have destroyed their distinctions and thus complicate
the interpretation of the patterns.
Please refer to the first column of Table 3.1. Suppose, for the moment,
we were to fire a gun using a barrel with a temperature of 10°F. As we can
see in the fourth column, the asymptotic representation of 10°F is 4000
units.
Of course, once we will have fired the first shot, the barrel immedi-
ately warms up to a higher temperature. For the sake of convenience in
this example, suppose the new barrel temperature becomes 20°F, which
gives us an asymptotic representation of 2000 units, an enormous drop by
exactly 50%. If this asymptotic representation corresponds with ballistic
reality, then we can expect a significant and radical shift in the placement
of the second shot relative to the placement of the first shot.
Likewise, if the third shot were to warm the barrel to 30°F, the asymp-
totic representation drops to 663 units – but, this time, much more than
50%. Once more, we would expect a significant shift in the placement of
the shot relative to the two preceding shots, and so forth.
After that, at 40°F, we notice a reduction in the drop of the asymptotic
representation. Instead of a successive increase in the drop of asymptotic
units as temperature increases, there is now a tendency to slow down its
rate of decrease. Look at the characteristic curve in Figure 3.2.
A Theory of the Asymptotic Function 51

Æ = ( PN/T°)( U-L ) T°

A B C DE F
G H

0°F 510°F
FIGURE 3.2 An asymptotic representation of temperature – a characteristic curve.

As soon as the barrel warms to 70°F, the asymptotic representation sta-

bilizes for a temperature range of 30°F or until it reaches 90°F. It follows
that, at 100°F, there is another significant drop in the asymptotic represen-
tation by 50%. This fact leads us to the inescapable conclusion that, if a
barrel were warming from 90°F to 100°F, there should be a highly notice-
able shift and disruption in the placement of shots downrange and in the
size of the groups as well.
Stabilization would not reoccur until the barrel reaches a temperature
of 120°F; then another shift in the placement of shots and grouping should
become evident at 190°F.

3.3 APPLICATION TO REALITY

The greatest stabilization of both placement and grouping would seem-

ingly occur in Group C, a temperature range from 120°F to 180°F, or a
total of 60°F in bandwidth. This suggests that, if we could design a gun
barrel to maintain a constant medium temperature of 150°F, then a fluctua-
tion in temperature from shot-to-shot, if we could keep it between 120°F
52 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

and 180°F, would reflect no noticeable change in either the placement of

shots or the size of groups downrange. The first shot would have the same
placement downrange as the last shot, with no shifting or climbing tenden-
cies. Groups would stay constant.
Better still, if we could maintain a minimum barrel temperature of
120°F, even if each successive shot were to increase the barrel temper-
ature, as long as the maximum temperature never exceeds 180°F, both
placement and grouping should be constant downrange.
Figure 3.1 should help us to conceptualize this asymptotic representa-
tion of temperature and its immediate engineering application. Stabiliza-
tion of shot-placement and grouping corresponds with relatively flat and
straight positions on the characteristic curve. Nor until the barrel reaches
a temperature of nearly 70°F does the curve nearly flatten out. When the
barrel is colder, between 0°F and 60°F, each increment is massive and
disruptive as the temperature increases with each successive shot. If we
can keep the barrel’s temperature between 120°F and 180°F, however, the
relatively flat curve at this bandwidth will provide a smooth transition with
the increase in temperature after each shot.

3.4 CONCLUSION

If our intuition proves correct, then the asymptotic representation of tem-

perature becomes an important consideration toward the study of ballistics
and the mechanics of accuracy.
If we were to design a gun barrel to maintain a constant initial shoot-
ing temperature within an interpretation of the asymptotic representation
of temperature, we could very well guarantee the probability of a first-
shot hit downrange and then maintain, perhaps indefinitely, all subsequent
placements and groups irrespective of the time between shots.
Asymptotic function is no longer a mathematical abstraction. It has a
relationship to the science of ballistic phenomena and at least one engi-
neering application concerning the study, design, and development of
long-range guns and other ballistic weapons as well.
Then, again, if we were to think about it for a moment, this asymptotic
representation of temperature may explain other physical phenomena as
A Theory of the Asymptotic Function 53

well, including the load-bearing characteristics of an automobile battery

in the cold of winter.

Apollonius of Perga (c. 262 BC–c. 190 BC) was a Greek geometer
and astronomer who wrote on conic section to greatly influence Ptolemy,
Francesco Maurolico, Johannes Kepler, Isaac Newton, and René Des-
cartes. He gave us the ellipse, the parabola and the hyperbola, among
many other developments, such as asymptote, including an explanation of
the motion of the planets and the different speeds of the Moon.
CHAPTER 4

THE THEORY OF TWIST

CONTENTS

4.1 The Laws of Twist.......................................................................... 56

If we were to increase muzzle velocity, for a given bullet length and diam-
eter, it would become necessary to decrease the rate of twist in the barrel
in order to properly stabilize the bullet.
If we were to increase the length of the bullet, from its base to its tip,
without either increasing its diameter or muzzle velocity, we would need
to increase the rate of twist to stabilize the bullet.
Therefore, there is now enough information to describe this relation-
ship between bullet lengths, bullet diameter, and muzzle velocity in a
mathematical formula.

TW = 2d √[MV/(Bl/d)] = 2√d3(MV/Bl) (1)

where TW = the proper rate of twist (turns per inch); d = the bullet’s diame-
ter (inch); MV = muzzle velocity (feet per second); Bl = bullet length (inch).
On the other hand, if we were to place a boat-tail configuration at the
base of the bullet, as is common among American military ballistic small
arms and artillery projectiles, it would have the effect of actually decreas-
ing the length of the bullet and decreasing cylinder drag; then we would
need to multiply the rate of twist by a factor of 0.90 to increase the rate
of twist.
56 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

TW = TW × 0.90 (2)

From the above relationships and formulas, we can derive the best
muzzle velocity (BMV), for a given rate of twist, bullet diameter, and
length, with the following algebraic manipulation.
1 ( Bl d ) TW 2  Bl (TW 2 )
 
BMV = 2 = (3)
2(d ) 2 4d 3
From that equation, we can just as easily calculate the best bullet length
(BBL) with a given rate of twist, muzzle velocity, and diameter, as:
2 (MV × d ) 4 (MV × d3)
BBL = ————— 2
2(d)2 = —————— 2
(4)
TW TW

4.1 THE LAWS OF TWIST

If we were to increase the bullet’s weight/length, without a change in muz-

zle velocity, we would need to increase the rate of twist.
If, on the other hand, we were to increase muzzle velocity, without an
increase in the bullet/ length, we would need to decrease the rate of twist.
Then, if we were to increase both the bullet’s muzzle velocity and
weight/length, we would need to increase its rate of twist.
For a given rate of twist, when we increase muzzle velocity, we would
need to increase the bullet’s weight/length to properly stabilize it.
For a given rate of twist, if we were to decrease muzzle velocity, we
would need to decrease the bullet’s weight/length to properly stabilize it.
CHAPTER 5

THE THEORY OF BULLET SPIN

CONTENTS

5.1 Introduction .................................................................................... 57

5.2 Conclusion ..................................................................................... 58

5.1 INTRODUCTION

Some time near the end of the 15th century, some people began to recog-
nize the importance of causing the bullet to spin in order to properly stabi-
lize it. Improvements were made by August Kotter in 1520 (biographical
material unavailable), who was an armorer in Nuremberg, Germany, at the
time; the original person responsible for the idea is unknown or uncertain.
Though several methods are presently available to cause the bullet to spin,
some of them more effective than others, with the most effective method
– for small arm ballistics – has been to install “rifling” inside the bore of
the barrel. As the bullet moves through the bore, the bore pressure forces
the bullet to take the shape of the rifling to spin at the rate of the rifling
twist in the bore.
Spin is directly proportional to velocity (V) and the rate of twist (TW).
If we increase the bore velocity, we increase the rate of spin. If we increase
the rate of twist, then we increase the rate of spin (ŵ).
Therefore, we have the following mathematical relationship between
velocity and twist to spin.

ŵ = V × TW (1)
58 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

Under either an experimental or field condition, if we know the bullet’s

velocity and rate of spin, we can determine the barrel’s rate of twist with
the following equation:
wˆ
TW = (2)
V
Then, if for some reason, if we need to know velocity but know the
bullet’s rate of spin and the barrel’s rate of twist instead, we can calculate
its velocity with the following equation:
wˆ (3)
V=
TW
A study of these relationships will reveal some interesting phenomena:
– If we can properly stabilize the bullet in the bore, with the proper spin,
the bullet will always have the proper stability at any distance downrange.
As the bullet’s velocity decelerates in its flight path, the rate of spin also
decelerates proportionately, which tends to keep the bullet at the proper
rate of spin for the proper stabilization (see Eq. (7)).

5.2 CONCLUSION

When we increase muzzle velocity, we increase the rate of spin. When we

increase the rate of twist, we also increase the rate of spin. If we can prop-
erly stabilize the bullet with the proper rate of spin, the bullet will always
maintain the correct rate of spin to correspond with the deceleration of
velocity throughout its entire flight path. So, it is critically important to use
the proper rate of twist. It makes a big difference.
CHAPTER 6

THE THEORY OF KINETIC ENERGY

CONTENTS

6.1 The Effect of Bullet Spin Over Angular Kinetic Energy ............... 62
6.2 Conclusion ..................................................................................... 63

“According to physics, kinetic energy is one of many types of energy that

exist. This is energy generated because something is moving – the faster
it’s going, the more kinetic energy it has. A person sitting has no kinetic
energy, but a person running like a maniac has tremendous kinetic energy:
if they run into you, you’ll feel the brunt of it. Footballs, baseballs, rocks,
bullets, airplanes, and anything else moving quickly through the air all
have kinetic energy.”
—Vocabulary.com

Albert Einstein holds the credit for being the first person responsible
for working out the mathematical relationship between mass and velocity
to energy in subatomic particles with his famous equation of E = MC2,
where E = energy; M = mass; and E = MC2 means the kinetic energy of
moving mass is mass × mass × the square of its velocity. C2 means the
square of the mass’s velocity at the speed of light. This equation deals
with the relationship between subatomic particles, such as the mass of
light travelling at the speed of light. It does not address the problems of
bullets or projectiles traveling at velocities substantially below the speed
of light.
60 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

“Albert Einstein (14 March 1879–18 April 1955) was a German-born

theoretical physicist. Einstein’s work is also known for its influence on
the philosophy of science. He developed the general theory of relativity,
one of the two pillars of modern physics (alongside quantum mechanics).
Einstein is best known in popular culture for his mass–energy equivalence
formula E = mc2 (which has been dubbed “the world’s most famous equa-
tion”). He received the 1921 Nobel Prize in Physics for his “services to
theoretical physics,” in particular his discovery of the law of the photo-
electric effect, a pivotal step in the evolution of quantum theory.”
—Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It was in the early 19th century, with people such as Gaspard-Gustave

de Coriolis or Gustave Coriolis (May 21, 1792–September 19, 1843), a
French mathematician, mechanical engineer, and scientist, who may have
been the first person who presented mechanics in a way people could
understand and use, and that lead to his development of the notion of
kinetic energy.
He published a book entitled, Calcul de l’Effet des Machines (“Cal-
culation of the Effect of Machines”) and, during this period, the theory of
kinetic energy of something moving well below the speed of light, such as
bullets and artillery projectiles, became recognized as 1/2 MV2.
William Thomson, (June 26, 1824–December 17, 1907), later Lord
Kelvin, has the credit for inventing the term “kinetic energy.” Kinetic
energy is the consequence of mass in motion. Without motion, there is no
kinetic energy, only potential energy.
The Theory of Kinetic Energy 61

Over the years, some people had recognized these two equations as
inadequate when dealing with anything moving less than but substantially
near the speed of light. So, over time, modifications of that brilliant for-
mula by Einstein and earlier works by Coriolis and Lord Kelvin were made
to accommodate the realities of the growing field of physics. We now have
several modifications to calculate the kinetic energy of particles travelling
at, near, below, or substantially below the speed of light, including ballistic
projectiles travelling only a few thousand feet a second.
Because small arm ballistics is the study of not particles or the mass
of light but of relatively large projectiles travelling at very slow veloci-
ties, relative to the speed of light, we must modify the equation further
to accommodate the realities of ballistics. We use the following equation,
worked out originally in the early 19th century for the science of mechan-
ics in England’s 19th century industries to calculate kinetic energy of bul-
lets in small arm ballistics:
KE = ½ MV2 (1)
As we can easily see, the above equation is a slight modification of
Einstein’s E = MC2, but has not changed since the early 19th century, in
which we multiply the bullet’s mass by the square of its velocity and then
divide the answer by 2.
In small arm ballistics in the United States, however, we modify the
equation further:

KE =
(W / 225218)V 2 (2)
2
where W = Weight (grains); V = Velocity (fps)
The figure, 225218, represents the product of one Avoirdupois pound
(7000 grains) and acceleration due to gravity or 32.172 ft/second/sec-
ond, designed to convert the weight of the bullet to its mass. In the Eng-
lish unit of measurement, we calculate mass by dividing the weight of
the bullet, in grains, by the product of 7000 and 32.174 (which equals
225218).
The figure, 32.172, is the standard in the American firearms industry
for acceleration due to gravity in the calculation of trajectory for the ballis-
tic tables common today among members of the shooting community, and
62 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

among bullet manufacturers in their reloading manuals and ballistic tables,

a figure representing the middle-ground in the above Table 6.1.
Obviously, Table 6.1 clearly reveals, as we move from either the North
or the South Pole to the Equator, acceleration due to gravity increases from
a minimum of 32.0862 feet per second from either pole to 32.2575 feet per
second at the equator. As we approach the equator, from either pole, things
falling from the sky fall faster (accelerates) – including small bullets from
guns.
A bullet of a given weight falling from the sky over the North Pole
would possess less velocity and kinetic energy than the same bullet falling
from the sky directly over the equator, though the difference is extremely
small in its total value but important in the accurate calculation of a bul-
let’s flight path or trajectory in any given position on the planet Earth.
If we were to add up each value of acceleration due to gravity in Table
7 and divide by 10, we would get the average value of 32.17187 or 32.172;
this is the reason behind the standard use of 32.172 in the firearms industry
and shooting community.

6.1 THE EFFECT OF BULLET SPIN OVER ANGULAR KINETIC

ENERGY

Many people in the shooting community, thinking independently of each

other, have developed the same conclusion – the standard equation to
TABLE 6.1
Acceleration due to Gravity (g)
0° – 32.0862
10° – 32.0916
20° – 32.1062
30° – 32.1290
40° – 32.1570
50° – 32.1867
60° – 32.2147
70° – 32.2375
80° – 32.2523
90° – 32.2575
The Theory of Kinetic Energy 63

calculate kinetic energy is defective! It fails to consider the kinetic energy

of the spin the bullet invariably creates; however, some of them – and it
happens almost every day – after careful consideration and research at
their local library or on the Internet in Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia,
they find the bullet’s spin generates a negligible amount of kinetic energy,
either in its forward direction or in the amount it transfers into each incre-
ment of penetration of its flight path or in the target. It is truly a trifling
amount, though a value we can easily calculate if important.
In any event, for those who want to know, the relationship between linear
(forward) and angular (spin) kinetic energy is the sum of linear kinetic
energy and one-half of the product of the bullet’s moment of inertia (I) and
the square of the angular velocity (ŵ).

KE = ½ MV + ½ Iŵ2 (3)

For round balls in the muzzle loading community, the same equation
takes the following appearance:

 MV 2 + ( 2 Mr 2 / 5 )  V ( πd / TW ) 
2

KE =   (4)
2

where “r” is the bullet’s radius; “M” represents mass of the bullet; “π” rep-
resents “Pi” or 3.1415 and “d” is the bullet’s diameter. The above equation
only works with the English unit of measurement. For the metric system,
we would have to modify it, of course.

6.2 CONCLUSION

Kinetic energy is the relationship between the bullet’s mass and its veloc-
ity. The greater the mass, for a given velocity, the greater is the kinetic
energy; and the greater the bullet’s velocity, for a given mass, the greater is
the kinetic energy in the bullet as it transfer a small increment of its kinetic
energy into each increment of penetration of its flight path.
The American shooting community uses the English unit of measure-
ment in its calculations of bullets travelling through 3,600 cubic inches in its
flight path for every interval of 100 yards following a parabolic trajectory
64 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

due to acceleration due to gravity. It cannot travel in a straight line because

of gravity, hence the parabolic trajectory.
On its way through this flight path, moreover, it transfers a small
amount of its kinetic energy into each cubic inch of penetration, a product
of transfer of energy (TE) and air density (ơ), or TE = KE × ơ (in this text,
we will stay with dry air density of 0.0000509 lb/cu./in. for our calcula-
tions). To be much more accurate, of course, we must use damp air density.
When there is a transfer of kinetic energy from the bullet into the air
of its flight path, it subtracts that amount of transfer of kinetic energy
from the kinetic energy of the bullet travelling forward to produce a slight
reduction in its forward velocity. With a reduction of that forward veloc-
ity, without a loss in bullet mass, there is a corresponding slight reduction
in kinetic energy, where KE = ½ MV2. This reduction or loss of forward
kinetic energy adds up and represents one of the three variables respon-
sible for the bullet’s drag: drag induced by transfer of energy; drag induced
by the surface area of the bullet’s nose; and drag induced by the surface
area of the bullet’s cylinder.
When the bullet arrives at the target, it has an initial terminal veloc-
ity (ξ) that represents the lethal kinetic energy going into penetration (or
reflection), and that amount is the amount remaining after the accumula-
tive transfer of energy into each increment of penetration in its flight path.
That accumulative amount is the summation of the total amount trans-
ferred into each cubic inch of penetration of the flight path before entering
the target.
Unlike light, which travels through a path with density, pursuant to
the transfer of energy relationship, transfers an increment of its forward
kinetic energy into each increment of penetration without losing forward
velocity or kinetic energy, a bullet in free flight, however, loses both veloc-
ity and kinetic energy at each increment of penetration and, eventually,
even if it does not strike anything, loses all forward velocity to fall to the
ground due to gravity.
Light, on the other hand, does not lose any of its forward velocity from
transfer of energy unless the density of the path it travels changes; then, it
will increase its forward velocity and energy with a reduction of density in
its path and decrease its forward velocity and energy with an increase in
the density – not from transfer of energy.
The Theory of Kinetic Energy 65

It will go up and down with its forward velocity and energy, and trans-
fer energy into each increment in its path, as the path’s density goes up and
down. Interestingly, unlike a bullet, an electrostatic charge in the light’s
path modulates the light’s velocity to make it also go up and down with the
strength of its charge. Bullets in free flight will not do that.
A bullet in free flight loses it velocity and kinetic energy due to the drag
of transfer of energy, drag induced by the surface area of the nose and drag
induced by the surface area of the cylinder.
Light, in sharp contrast, loses energy in a relationship of one/half of
the cube root of the ratio of the energy to the third power of the distance
between the source of the energy and the target downrange or:

Em = 1
2
3
E / D3 (5)

where Em = remaining energy at the point of measurement (joules/

sq.cm/second); E = energy output from the source (Joules/second); D =
distance between the source of the energy and the target downrange (kilo-
meters).
We can use a common flashlight as an analogy to explain the way
light loses its energy through dispersion. Go into a darken room and, at
an approximate distance of two feet, turn on the flashlight facing a wall.
Then slowly back up until the diameter of the projected illumination on
the wall gets so large it disappears altogether. Energy from our Sun does
the same thing but at a much greater distance due to its enormous power
output of approximately 3.86 × 1033 ergs per second or 3.86 × 1028 joules
per second, but on the outer surface of the Earth’s atmosphere, about 93
million miles away, the energy level drops to a mere 8.331732 joules per
second per square centimeter.
Acceleration due to gravity and the velocity of things and bullets fall-
ing from the sky vary with the latitudinal position on our planet. As we
move from either the North or South Pole to the equator, acceleration due
to gravity increases, from the lowest value of 32.0862 at either the North
or South Pole, to a maximum value of 32.2575 at the equator. So, the
weight of things and bullets vary with its position relative to our planet’s
latitudinal lines. Velocity and kinetic energy increases or decreases as we
move in between the poles and the equator.
66 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

Angular (spin) kinetic energy is too insignificant for us to include in

the calculation of kinetic energy, ballistic tables, or the calculation and
prediction of trajectory in small arm ballistics. So, we ignore it.
CHAPTER 7

TEMPERATURE CONVERSION
FORMULAS

CONTENTS

7.1 Introduction .................................................................................... 67

7.2 Conclusion ..................................................................................... 68

7.1 INTRODUCTION

Frequently, it has become necessary for us in the shooting community to

convert a temperature reading from one scale to another.
The International System of Units is a name adopted by the Eleventh
General Conference on Weights and Measures, which was held in Paris,
France, in 1960, in order to develop a consistent system of units of mea-
surements based on the meter-kilogram-second system (MKS).
This international system is called SI and represents the initials of Sys-
tem International.
In the same year, the Conference adopted a temperature scale based on
a fixed temperature, namely the triple point of water in which the solid,
liquid, and gas maintain an equilibrium.
In the Fahrenheit scale, the system is based on 32°F as representing
the freezing point of water and 212°F as its boiling point. While, on the
other hand, the Celsius scale uses 0°C as the freezing point and 100°C as
the boiling point.
However, we can use a mathematical formula to convert one to the
other, or back. Actually, we have eight conversion formulas.
68 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

(1) °C to °F = (°C × 9/5) + 32

(2) °F to °C = (°F – 32) × 5/9
(3) °C to °K = °C + 273.15
(4) °K to °C = °K – 273.15
(5) °F to °R = °F + 459.7
(6) °R to °F = °R – 459.7
(7) °C to °R = °C × 4/5
(8) °R to °C = °R × 5/4

7.2 CONCLUSION

Members of the shooting community throughout the world should no lon-

ger experience a difficulty in converting a temperature scale from one to
another. They are quite simple to work out correctly.
CHAPTER 8

BULLET GEOMETRY

CONTENTS

8.1 The Five Basic Shapes ................................................................... 70

8.2 The Six Basic Bullet Types ............................................................ 71

“Geometry (from the Ancient Greek: γεωμετρία; geo- “earth,” -metron

“measurement”) is a branch of mathematics concerned with questions of
shape, size, relative position of figures, and the properties of space.”
—Wikipedia – the free encyclopedia

Frequently, it has been necessary for the serious bullet maker and ammu-
nition reloader in the shooting community to calculate the physical or geo-
metric attributes of a bullet. With varying configurations – shapes and sizes
– even the calculation of surface areas can be tedious, among other things.
We have five basic shapes to make up and form into the shape of a
bullet:
(1) Round-nose to shape the bullet’s head;
(2) Spitzer points to shape the bullet’s head;
(3) Cylinder to form the sides of the bullet; and
(4) Flat surfaces to shape either the bullet’s base or its flat head.
We have six basic bullet types:
(1) Wad cutter (WC);
(2) Semi-Wad cutter (SWC);
70 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

(3) Round-Nose (RN);

(4) Flat-Nose (FN);
(5) Spitzer Point (SP); and
(6) Spitzer Point Boat-Tail (SPBT).

8.1 THE FIVE BASIC SHAPES

If we were to use the following five basic shapes, we could then assem-
ble the shape of a bullet and, with these shapes, calculate their physical
attributes.

a
Round Nose

b
1 2
Volume = 2 πb a
Surface area = πb(b+a)

Spitzer Nose
r

Volume = 13 r2h
—
Surface area = πr √r2 + h2 = πrl

Bullet Cylinder

r
Volume = πr2h
Surface = 2πrh
Bullet Geometry 71

r
Round Ball

Volume = 43 πr2
Surface area = 4πr2

r
Base

Surface area = πr2

8.2 THE SIX BASIC BULLET TYPES

The following six basic bullet types, made up of the preceding five basic
shapes, contain the following mathematical equations in order to calculate
their entire physical attributes.
x y
Spitzer Bullet w/Flat Base

r
Volume = (πr2x) + (πr2y/3)
Area = (2πrx) + (πry)
Surface area = (2πr)(r+x) + (πy)(r+y)
Base = πr2
72 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

x y

Spitzer Bullet w/Boat-Tail

r = Radius of Boat-Tail R = Radius of Cylinder

Volume = (πR2x) + (πR2y/3) [(πy/3) (R2+R+r+r2)]

Area = (2πRx) + [π(R+r)z] + (πRy)
Surface area = [(2πR)(R+x)] + π[R2 + (R+r2)(z+r2)] + πR(R+y)
Base = πr2

x y

Flat-Nose Bullet w/Flat Base r

R

Volume = (πR2x) + [(πy/3)(R2+R+r+r2)]

Area = (2πRx) + [π(R+r)y]
Surface area = [(2πR)(R+x)] + π[R2+(R+r2)(y+r2)]
Base = πR2
CHAPTER 9

STATISTICS

CONTENTS

9.1 Introduction .................................................................................... 73

9.2 Basic Statistical Tools .................................................................... 74
9.3 Conclusion ..................................................................................... 77

“The history of statistics can be said to start around 1749 although, over
time, there have been changes to the interpretation of the word statistics.
In early times, the meaning was restricted to information about states.
This was later extended to include all collections of information of all
types, and later still it was extended to include the analysis and interpre-
tation of such data. In modern terms, “statistics” means both sets of col-
lected information, as in national accounts and temperature records, and
analytical work which require statistical inference.”
—Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

9.1 INTRODUCTION

Statistics represents a special branch of the science of mathematics that

deals with the collection, organization, and analysis of numerical data to
allow the scientist, the technician, the engineer, or any ordinary person,
with a need to know for that matter, to interpret and use information cor-
rectly for the explicit purpose of making competent decisions.
74 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

It has been the principle concern of most members of the shooting com-
munity to examine the numerical data responsible for shooting accuracy.
If it does not concern or contribute to accuracy, or the variables affecting
accuracy, then most members simply lack the interest to study it. Truth-
fully, if the numerical data prove irrelevant to the science of small arms
ballistics, or the variables responsible for accuracy, it has no real relevance
to us anyway.
Nor is it necessary for us to delve in the advance or “higher statistics”
of the normal numerical data we commonly encounter in our collective
quest for knowledge about guns and ballistics. Only the expert scientist or
engineer finds it truly necessary to venture beyond the use of basic statisti-
cal tools of collecting, organizing, and analyzing ballistic numerical data.
To the average member of the shooting community, these basic statistical
tools are entirely adequate most of the time.

9.2 BASIC STATISTICAL TOOLS

For us, as members of the shooting community, but not necessarily includ-
ing or excluding the academic community, there are four basic statistical
tools we can consistently find useful in either the treatment or interpreta-
tion of ballistic numerical data:
(1) mean average;
(2) standard deviation;
(3) extreme spread;
(4) probability.

9.2.1 MEAN AVERAGE

“In mathematics and statistics … is simply the mean or average when

the context is clear … the sum of a collection of numbers divided by the
number of numbers in the collection.” – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The measurement of mean average as a statistical tool, such as the mean
average of muzzle velocity in the distribution of 100 chronographic
readings, represents an accurate and useful measurement of the central
Statistics 75

tendency of a particular lot of ammunition, with a particular gun and at

a particular period and place in time. It is a useful datum point for us to
anticipate the muzzle velocity of a particular lot of ammunition.
i =1
∑ χi  χ∞ (1)
Mean average =
N

As the equation says, the summation (Σ) of χi to χ∞, with χi representing

a numerical datum point, such as muzzle velocity, and χ∞ representing an
infinite number of datum points, divides by “N,” the number of scores, mea-
surements, or observations, such as the number of muzzle velocity readings
from an electronic chronograph, represents the mean average or central
tendency of this distribution of scores, measurements or observations.

9.2.2 STANDARD DEVIATION

“In statistics, the standard deviation (Sd) (represented by the Greek letter
sigma, σ) is a measure that is used to quantify the amount of variation or
dispersion of a set of data values. A low standard deviation indicates that
the data points tend to be very close to the mean (also called the expected
value) of the set, while a high standard deviation indicates that the data
points are spread out over a wider range of values.” – Wikipedia, the free
encyclopedia
Traditionally, standard deviation has been defined as the square root of
the square of the sums (Σχ2) of a distribution of scores divided by the num-
ber of scores (N) – minus the sum of the squares (Σχ2) – and then divided
again by the same number of scores (N); or:

∑ χ2 − ( ∑ χ ) / N
2

Sd = (2)
N

Standard deviation serves as a statistical tool for us to judge the pattern

of dispersion from the central tendency, such as the pattern of dispersion
from the average muzzle velocity in a distribution of muzzle velocities
(scores). It helps us to interpret a pattern in the distribution of scores and
to apply our interpretation more meaningfully.
76 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

9.2.3 EXTREME SPREAD

“In a firing accuracy test, the distance between the two shots farthest from
each other.”
—The Free Dictionary by Farlex

Extreme spread is a simple concept to understand. It is the difference

between the lowest score and the highest score in a distribution of scores,
and helps us to locate and to identify the range of frequencies in a given
distribution.

ES = dχ (3)

9.2.4 PROBABILITY

“Probability theory is the branch of mathematics concerned with probabil-

ity, the analysis of random phenomena. The central objects of probability
theory are random variables, stochastic processes, and events: mathemati-
cal abstractions of non-deterministic events or measured quantities that
may either be single occurrences or evolve over time in an apparently ran-
dom fashion. If an individual coin toss or the roll of dice is considered to
be a random event, then if repeated many times, the sequence of random
events will exhibit certain patterns, which can be studied and predicted.
Two representative mathematical results describing such patterns are the
law of large numbers and the central limit theorem.”
—Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Probability, in the context of the science of ballistics for the shooting com-
munity, would represent at most a statistical tool to help us to predict the
next muzzle velocity or anything else – such as the maximum chamber
pressure, point of impact downrange, distance from baseline in the cal-
culation of trajectory, depth of penetration, etc. – after we have obtained
enough data in order to make a prediction. The greater the amount of data,
the greater is the accuracy we can make in our prediction.
Statistics 77

∑ χ ES (4)
Probability = −
N 2
where Σχ = summation of the number of scores; N = number of scores;
ES = extreme spread.
The above formula (4), a derivative of the formula to calculate the
probability in the throw of dice, is a function of the summation of scores,
such as a series of muzzle velocity readings in a test or experiment, divided
by the number of scores, or readings, minus one half of the extreme spread
(ES) of those scores.

9.3 CONCLUSION

Statistics deals with the collection, organization, and analysis of numeri-

cal data allowing us to interpret and use information more correctly and,
perhaps, more precisely for the purpose of helping us to make more intel-
ligent decisions.
For us in the shooting community, there are four basic statistical tools
we can use consistently in our quest for accuracy:
(1) mean average;
(2) standard deviation;
(3) extreme spread; and
(4) probability.
Mean average is the central tendency of frequencies in the distribution
of scores.
Standard deviation is a statistical tool to judge the pattern of dispersion
relative to the central tendency.
Extreme spread represents the difference between the lowest and the
highest scores in a distribution of scores.
Probability helps us to predict the next score, such as muzzle velocity,
once we have gathered enough data for such a prediction.
When we use these statistical tools properly, with the proper numerical
data, we immediately put ourselves in a position to make more intelligent
and competent interpretations, judgments, and decisions.
SECTION TWO
CHAPTER 10

THE SCIENCE OF
EXTERIOR BALLISTICS

CONTENTS

10.1 Definition ..................................................................................... 81

“External ballistics or exterior ballistics is the part of ballistics that deals

with the behavior of a non-powered projectile in flight. External ballis-
tics is frequently associated with firearms, and deals with the unpowered
free-flight phase of the bullet after it exits the barrel and before it hits the
target, so it lies between transitional ballistics and ballistics. However,
external ballistics is also concerned with the free-flight of rockets and
other projectiles, such as balls, arrows, etc.”
—Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

10.1 DEFINITION

Exterior ballistics is the scientific study of the patterns and relationships

of the effects and characteristics of the physical environment over the free
flight characteristics of the bullet.
Its study starts at the precise moment the bullet leaves the barrel, con-
tinues throughout the bullet’s entire free flight path, and finally stops at
the precise moment the bullet strikes the target but before it begins to
penetrate or transfer its kinetic energy into it.
82 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

It includes the calculations and predictions of a bullet’s trajectory and

all physical attributes that affect its flight characteristics.
It also includes the effects and characteristics of our planet’s gravita-
tional forces, rotational movements, and its atmospheric envelope, includ-
ing the effects of the Sun, the Moon, and all the effects and characteristics
of the gravitational and electromagnetic forces and movements of the solar
system that affect a bullet in free flight.
CHAPTER 11

THE FIELD-EFFECT THEORY

CONTENTS

11.1 Definition ..................................................................................... 83

11.2 Introduction .................................................................................. 83
11.3 Theory .......................................................................................... 85
11.4 The Source of Energy................................................................... 85
11.5 The Field-Effect Characteristic Curve ......................................... 86
11.6 Real-Time Study .......................................................................... 87
11.7 Progression of Curves .................................................................. 88

11.1 DEFINITION

“In physics, the Field Effect refers to the modulation of the electrical con-
ductivity of a material by the application of an external electric field.”
—Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In the science of ballistics, “’field-effect’ refers to the modulation of sun-

light and gravity over a bullet’s flight path.”
—Alvah Buckmore, Jr.

11.2 INTRODUCTION

One day back in the hot and humid summer of 1979, while shooting at
silhouettes in the Westfield Sportsman Club (Massachusetts), we stopped
84 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

shooting in order to observe another man shooting at a metallic target on

a pair of metal rails.
Finding his experimental work most interesting, we walked over to this
man’s table to observe his work more closely. On his table, we found some
neatly written data representing the experiment’s results. As we dropped
down our head to read the written material on the table, the man said, “Oh!
Please don’t pay any attention to that material … I can’t get consistent
results …”
On the table was a gun mounted in a bench-rest and a pair of chrono-
graphic screens about 15 feet from the end of the barrel.
Twenty-five feet from the table was the target directly in front of the
chronographic screens. It was a piece of metal one inch thick, four inches
wide, and four inches high mounted on a rail-road track mechanism of
about four feet long and with the individual rails about 3½ inches apart
from each other.
Alongside the target and mechanism was a common yardstick in the
English unit of measurement. The man would place the metal target at the
front of the rails. Then, every time a bullet would hit the metal target, the
target would withdraw backwards due to the release and transfer of kinetic
energy from the bullet to the target. After that, he would walk back down
the range to measure the distance of travel with his yardstick and to move
the target back to its original position on the rails for another shot.
In spite of his efforts, he complained, he could not get his loads to shoot
consistently from shot to shot. He said, while pointing to his data on the
table, “The same loads shoot differently every day.” Some days, such as
yesterday, he noted, the same loads knocked the metal target further on
the rails than today. He contributed this problem to his loads. They were
too imprecisely reloaded to shoot consistently, he thought. “I need better
reloading equipment,” he was truly bewildered and frustrated, he admitted.
Thinking, we looked down at the data; looked across to the chrono-
graphic screens; looked downrange at the target; and, finally, looked up to
the sky and saw the Sun almost directly overhead.
Looking down again, we read the date, time, and temperature of the
data entries.
Looking up at the sky again, without saying a word to our friend, we
began to perceive and recognize relationships, never before noticed that day,
The Field-Effect Theory 85

between velocity, kinetic energy, momentum, recoil, air density, time in the
direction of sun-light, and to the relative position of the Sun in the sky.

11.3 THEORY

In a scientifically valid experiment, if we were to fire a gun at one-hour

intervals, starting from seven o’clock in the morning until seven o’clock
the following morning, at the same or similar target, we would eventually
verify the field-effect theory.
At seven o’clock in the morning, with the temperature cooler and air
denser than later in the afternoon, the bullet striking the metallic target
would cause it to move backwards on its tracks for a given, easily measur-
able distance.
Conversely, as the Sun climbs higher and higher over the horizon, the
air in the bullet’s flight path becomes less and less dense with each incre-
mental increase in temperature. Bullet velocity increases as the air density
decreases; then kinetic energy increases with the increase in velocity.
Because velocity and kinetic energy increases with each incremental
increase in temperature, as the day progresses, the target moves further
and further away with each successive shot.
Our friend, unaware of the effects and characteristics of sunlight over
air density in the bullet’s flight path, had falsely assumed his “problem”
to have been caused by faulty ammunition. In his naivety, he mistakenly
assumed a given combination of primer, gunpowder, and bullet weight
would yield a given and constant velocity – apparently 24 hours a day! He
was wrong!

11.4 THE SOURCE OF ENERGY

We have two sources of energy in this field-effect phenomenon: solar con-

duction (Sc) and solar convection (Sv).
Solar conduction is the direct transmission of solar energy from the
Sun.
Solar convection is the re-transmission of solar energy from the Earth’s
surface. Depending on soil and water properties, their physical properties
86 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

and capacity to store or reflect solar energy from the Sun, the surface of the
Earth will absorb some of the Sun’s energy during the daytime and then
release most of it during the nighttime. At the same time, during the day-
time, with the Sun somewhere in between the two horizons, while absorb-
ing solar energy, the Earth will simultaneously release some of it as well.
This means, among other things, the air density in the bullet’s flight
path will either warm up or cool off directly due to energy from the Sun
and (reflecting or releasing) energy from the Earth’s surface.
So, the mathematical relationship between solar conduction and solar
convection to field-effect is the following:
n=∞

Ξ = ∑ (∆Sc,∆Sv) (1)
MV→ ξ

where field-effect (Ξ) is the summation (Σ) of each increment (Δ) of solar
conduction (Sc) and each increment (Δ) of solar convection (Sv) in the
bullet’s flight path from the muzzle velocity (MV) to the initial terminal
velocity (ξ). The number of computations (n) is infinite (∞).
The unit of measurement is either calories or British thermal units
(BTU).
Though the number of increments for computation can be infinite (n =
∞) in the bullet’s flight path, the computations start from MV and stop at
the precise moment the bullet strikes the target at ξ, but before it begins
penetration or transfers energy into it.

11.5 THE FIELD-EFFECT CHARACTERISTIC CURVE

As reported earlier, as the day progresses from seven o’clock in the morn-
ing to mid-day, we will observe a progression of travel on the railroad
tracks after each successive shot in which velocity, kinetic energy, momen-
tum, and recoil also increase successively. Noise level decreases as the day
progresses due to the progressive reduction of air density, however.
As our Sun approaches the horizon, from mid-day to dust, each succes-
sive shot thereafter causes a successive reduction in the distance of travel
on the railroad tracks.
The Field-Effect Theory 87

Drawing a characteristic curve on a piece of graph paper (Figure 11.1),

the curve rises rapidly, starting from seven o’clock in the morning to mid-
day – its peak and then rapidly falls to a very low level when the Sun
drops below the horizon. From then on, the characteristic curve nearly
flattens out with only a gradual decline throughout early and late evening;
as early morning arrives, just before the Sun, still below the horizon, starts
to warm the air, the characteristic curve rises with the rising Sun. When
the Sun pops over the horizon, the characteristic curve rises more rapidly
after each successive shot until it reaches a position of numerical value, on
the graph paper, similar to the position it may have held 24 hours earlier.

11.6 REAL-TIME STUDY

Naturally, in a real-time study, the actual field-effect is much more com-

plex than the way we have just described it. As an example, cloudcover
may obscure direct observation of the Sun – either partially or completely
over the bullet’s flight path – momentarily or continuously – while the
total effect between Sc and Sv will correspondingly increase or decrease
the summation of values in each increment of the bullet’s flight path, with
sometimes solar convection more important than solar conduction in day-
time. Ordinarily, it is the other way around.

A E
C
D

FIGURE 11.1 The field-effect characteristic curve.

88 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

11.7 PROGRESSION OF CURVES

As we know very well, the Earth rotates around the Sun in an elliptical
path and takes a year to complete a full cycle. As the distance and angle of
incident (the angle at which the sunlight strikes the Earth) is different each
day, the amount of energy striking the Earth’s surface is different, too, with
the amount of energy gradually decreasing with approaching winter or
gradually increasing with approaching summer.
This phenomenon accounts for the Progression of Curves (Figure 11.2)
in the field-effect theory. It means that each 24-hour characteristic curve
(Figure 11.1) will be slightly different than the preceding 24-hour charac-
teristic curve. With approaching summer, this curve will rise in relatively
uniform steps of progression, with slight variations each day depending
on a wide variety of technical and climatic conditions such as clouds,
storms, rain, snow, relative humidity, temperature, and cooling and warm-
ing winds. With approaching winter, of course, the opposite effect occurs
(Figure 11.2).
Any typical 24-hour characteristic curve will consist of several basic
components necessary for us to fully understand the field-effect theory.
• A–E is the daily curve;
• B is the peak of the daily curve for a given day;
• C–D is the nightly curve;

FIGURE 11.2 Progression of curves of the field-effect theory.

The Field-Effect Theory 89

• C – E is the early morning transitional curve and the carrying

threshold important to the successful operation of automatic weap-
on systems.
In the summertime, this Carrying Threshold is probably unimportant
to automatic weapons most of the time; however, in the winter – partic-
ularly in cold winters – the Carrying Threshold may seriously alter the
time-pressure curve (Figure 1.4) and burning-rate characteristics of gun-
powders and hence the operation of the automatic action and cyclic rate
of fire. So, it is critically important, particularly in military applications,
to design, develop, and employ a gunpowder that will function properly
in all carrying thresholds in the progression of curves throughout the year
in any climatic system. Sometimes, it may prove necessary to change the
gunpowder, to a faster or slower burning one, when entering a very cold
or very hot climatic region (sometimes along with a “hotter” or “colder”
primer).
In very cold regions, the operation of the automatic action may become
too sluggish to be militarily useful and reliable. On the other hand, the
cyclic rate of fire in a very hot climate may be far too fast for the design
of the automatic action to be safe for the gun, and certainly may cause an
unnecessary expenditure of ammunition, and may have been the case in
Vietnam along with a tendency for the soldiers to fire far too many rounds
due to its mild recoil and the panic they felt during combat.
In any event, throughout any position of the 24-hour characteristic
curve, the operation of the automatic action and its subsequent cyclic rate
of fire will vary with the characteristic curve, even with additives in the
gunpowder to reduce its sensitivity to temperature (and, in part, due to the
lubricants’ and the buffer spring’s sensitivity to temperature).
In view of the progression of curves, the cyclic rate of fire of any auto-
matic action will vary each day, with a tendency to increase with approach-
ing summer and to decrease with approaching winter.
In addition, the buffer springs, rebound slides, the main springs and
tension bars will vary in both tension and “feel” with the progression of
curves, from day to day with revolvers and, like automatic weapon sys-
tems, possess a tendency to increase tension with approaching summer
and decrease with approaching winter.
90 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

Sometimes, when too light but operative in the summertime, a main

spring or tension bar may not operate entirely or consistently in the win-
tertime.
When we adjust the tension on the main spring and rebound slide of a
revolver during the summertime, we must remember to be careful to avoid
making them too light. Perhaps, in view of these circumstances, it is better
to adjust them during the wintertime.
If very light in the summertime, even when very pleasant to shoot, with
just 1½ to 2½ pounds of pressure to pull back the trigger (for serious target
work and competition), instead of the 5 to 15 pounds of pressure some
firearms manufactures mandate in their handguns (for self-defense and to
avoid liability in a court of law), they may not operate the action satisfac-
torily during the wintertime or during a cold evening or early morning. Nor
may the hammer strike the primer with sufficient force to cause an ignition.
In fact, the serious shooter, who does his own honing and stoning of the
trigger assembly, frequently finds it necessary to adjust revolver springs
twice a year, once for the winter and once for the summer. Firearm manu-
factures, of course, install springs much stronger than really necessary to
ensure complete reliability throughout the entire year of the progression
of curves, perhaps without their realizing they are dealing with the pro-
gression of curves. They may just want to make the action safe to use for
everyone regardless of his measure or level of competency.
CHAPTER 12

A THEORY OF THE EFFECT OF

FIELD-EFFECT OVER TIME

CONTENTS

12.1 Introduction .................................................................................. 91

12.2 Further Clarification..................................................................... 93
12.3 Conclusion ................................................................................... 96

12.1 INTRODUCTION

If we were to spend some time out of doors during a very late evening
or very, very early morning, it will become perceptible to most of us the
amount of time between the times on a clock is longer than the same
amount of time during a warmer period of time in the daytime.
If we were to get up every morning at the same time, day-in-day-out,
every day of the year – to brush our teeth, to comb our hair, to wash and
shave our face and to eat our breakfast – it will soon become very appar-
ent the amount of time it takes to perform these simple but important tasks
vary considerably every day.
When we wind our wristwatch every morning, equally as perceptible,
in the middle of winter, the mainspring takes longer to wind than it does
in the middle of summer.
As each day approaches summer, though the distance between the
intervals or graduated lines of time on the clock stays constant, unless
something distorts their distances, the duration of time between those
intervals or graduated lines shrink and, as each day approaches winter, the
duration of those intervals or graduated lines expand.
92 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

When we perform the same tasks every day at the same time, the
amount of time it takes to perform these same tasks will increase as the
temperature increases and decrease as the temperature decreases.
As we stated earlier, the field-effect affects the air’s density in the bul-
let’s flight path. When temperature increases, due to an increase in the
amount of solar energy from the Sun, the time-pressure curve and burning
rate characteristics of the gunpowder changes to produce a higher cham-
ber pressure, a shorter time-pressure curve, and a faster burning powder,
and hence a higher muzzle velocity and a loss of timing as the gunpowder
stops burning before the bullet leaves the barrel. Then, the air density in
the bullet’s flight path also decreases which increases the bullet’s trajec-
tory velocity, kinetic energy, and momentum, due to a drop in aerodynamic
drag on the bullet. A higher muzzle velocity and trajectory velocity will
give us a flatter trajectory (see The Effect of Field-Effect Over Trajectory).
Likewise, when temperature decreases, due to a decrease in the amount
of solar energy from the Sun, the time-pressure curve and burning rate
characteristics of the gunpowder changes to produce a lower chamber
pressure, a longer time-pressure curve, and a slower burning powder, and
hence a lower muzzle velocity and a loss of timing as the gunpowder con-
tinues to burn a little after the bullet leaves the barrel.
Then, the air density in the bullet’s flight path also increases which
decreases the bullet’s trajectory velocity, kinetic energy, and momentum,
due to an increase in aerodynamic drag on the bullet. A lower muzzle
velocity and trajectory velocity will give us a more parabolic trajectory
At the same time, however, there is an additional variable responsible
to affect the bullet’s trajectory – time! The amount of solar energy in a
bullet’s flight path increases as the Sun rises; then time contracts and time
of flight takes more time. The amount of solar energy decreases with the
setting Sun; then time expands and time of flight takes less time.
So, along with a reduction of the air density in the bullet’s flight path,
which gives us a higher velocity and flatter trajectory, when temperature
increases due to an increase in solar energy from the Sun, the amount of
time it takes for the bullet to complete its trajectory lengthens. When the
temperature decreases, time expands and the bullet takes less time to com-
plete its trajectory and to become more parabolic due to the corresponding
reduction in trajectory velocity from an increase in aerodynamic drag.
A Theory of the Effect of Field-Effect Over Time 93

Therefore, the mathematical relationship of the effect of field-effect

(Ξ’) over time (t) is the product of field-effect (Ξ) and time (t) to time (T’).

T’ = Ξ × t (1)

where Ξ = field-effect is the summation of solar conduction and solar con-

vection in each increment of air in the bullet’s flight path; t = actual time
measured by a clock; T = effect of field effect over time.

12.2 FURTHER CLARIFICATION

To clarify this concept of the expansion and contraction of time, think of

time as a straight line which we must break down into uniform, constant,
and equidistant intervals (Figure 12.1), the way we customarily think of
time.
Then, if something were to modulate time – cause it to expand or con-
tract – though the number of intervals would stay constant, the distance
between them would increase with the expansion of time and decrease
with its contraction (Figure 12.2).
Or think of time as a ruler with uniform lines of graduation at 1/64-
inch intervals. Make it from a material highly sensitive to temperature.
When the temperature is 70°F, the distances between the intervals are cor-
rect at 1/64 of an inch; however, as the temperature decreases, the ruler
stretches uniformly throughout its entire length, which would automati-
cally increase the distance between each interval.
If the ruler were not a ruler but time, and if something were to cause it
to expand, then the amount of time it would take to perform a certain task
would decrease relative to the new distance between the intervals.
This phenomenon of stretching time would, in effect, shorten time or
the amount of time it would take to perform a given task.

9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Time Time

Present

FIGURE 12.1
94 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

2 1 0 1 2
Time Time

Expansion

9876543210123456789

Contraction
FIGURE 12.2

In the science of small arms ballistics, the amount of time it would take
a bullet to travel through its trajectory would shorten when time expands
and increase when time contracts. In effect, it would appear as if the bul-
let’s velocity were decreasing with an expansion of time and increasing
with its contraction.
As the illustrations in Figures 12.2 through 12.4 clearly demonstrate,
time is longer in the nighttime and in the early morning hours of the day
with the Sun still below or slightly over the horizon. During mid-day, after
the Sun has had hours to warm the Earth’s surface (Figures 12.4) time
is the shortest time of the day. Then, as the Sun approaches the opposite

Moon

2 1 0 1 2
Time Time
Expansion

Early morning parabolic trajectory

FIGURE 12.3
A Theory of the Effect of Field-Effect Over Time 95

9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Time Time

Contraction in mid-night

Mid-day parabolic trajectory

FIGURE 12.4

horizon, the day slowly cools down and the time plasma begins to expand
again to separate the graduated lines for longer time duration during the
nighttime (Figures 12.5).
To repeat, in the nighttime and the early morning hours, the distances
between each interval of time is the longest (Figures 12.4 and 12.5); as
the day warms from the Sun climbing over the horizon, time contracts and
the distances between each time interval shortens (Figure 12.3). As the
day cools, the time again expands as the distances between each interval

2 1 0 1 2
Time Time

Expansion

Late afternoon parabolic trajectory

FIGURE 12.5
96 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

lengthens (Figure 12.4). So, the effect of field-effect over time has the
same characteristic curve as the field-effect characteristic curve (Figure
1.4) (see The Field-Effect theory), including the progression of curves.
Interestingly, as time contracts or expands constantly throughout any
24-hour day, it not only affects the bullet’s time of flight but its trajectory
as well (see A Theory of the Effect of Field-Effect Over Trajectory).

12.3 CONCLUSION

In our preliminary analysis of this subject, it gradually became obvious

there was a growing possibility for the development of another science,
possibly several new sciences, along with new technologies and industries
evolving from the science of small arms ballistics.
When we look at field-effect and the effect of field-effect over a bul-
let’s trajectory and time itself, it becomes almost flagrantly obvious, that,
in order for the Sun and sunlight to modulate time – to cause it to expand
or contract over a period of 24 hours every day – means time has to be
a physical entity. It can no longer be a simple abstraction, concept or a
convenient way to measure equidistant intervals in a 24-hour day from a
clock, or even a simple variable or subexpression in the formula to cal-
culate speed when we know distance. We now know that distances and
velocities change with the modulation of time and that time varies with
solar energy and gravity (see A Theory of the Effect of Gravity Over
Time). It is not a constant!
Time, for the Sun and sunlight, later, when we will discover gravity as
well, to modulate its properties – to make it expand or contract – must be
a physical substance, most likely a plasma, and the only place we can find
such a plasma comes from the Sun itself. Indeed, our whole Universe con-
tains this plasma. It is everywhere! It is this star stuff emanating from our
Sun and other stars that make up the stuff of time and, when we research
this star stuff in outer space, we will soon discover that it is indeed a
plasma and contains a small electrostatic charge to it as well, which may
explain the reason light travels faster in outer space than in a vacuum.
It may be that it is this small electrostatic charge in outer space that is
responsible for modulating the velocity of light.
A Theory of the Effect of Field-Effect Over Time 97

When we examine a bullet traveling down its flight path, in addition

to the three components of drag – drag induced by the transfer of energy,
drag induced by the surface area of the nose, and drag induced by the sur-
face area of the cylinder – there is also a more unpredictable but a calcu-
lable variable drag or accelerate induced by the field-effect’s modulation
over time and trajectory.
Now we go into the effect of gravity over time, distance, direction, and
velocity.
CHAPTER 13

A THEORY OF THE EFFECT OF

GRAVITY OVER TIME

CONTENTS

13.1 Introduction .................................................................................. 99

13.2 Conclusion ................................................................................. 100

13.1 INTRODUCTION

“Gravitation or gravity is a natural phenomenon by which all physical

bodies attract each other. Gravity gives weight to physical objects and
causes them to fall toward one another.”
—Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In Chapter 12 – A Theory of the Effect of Field-Effect Over Time – we

demonstrated a relationship between solar energy from the Sun to the
expansion and contraction of time. As the Sun slides from the eastern sky
to the western sky, time – in a relative position of expansion before sun-
rise – slowly contracts with the rising Sun to reduce the distance between
the intervals of time and therefore increases time. When the Sun moves
beyond mid-day, the warmest time of the day, time – at its greatest period
of contraction for the day – begins to expand. Time then stretches out to
separate the distance between the graduated lines of time to make time
longer.
But there is another variable in the contraction and expansion of time
– gravity. Gravity has the same effect over time, and relationship to time,
as field-effect.
100 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

Mathematically, the effect of gravity (g’) is a relationship of the prod-

uct of gravity (g) and time (t) to time (T”).

T” = g × t (1)

where g = The Sun’s gravitational pull or any other gravitational pull from
elsewhere; t = actual time by a clock; T” = effect of gravity over time.

13.2 CONCLUSION

Because the effect of gravity over time has some of the same effects as the
effect of field-effect over time, it has the same mathematical relationship.
When we shoot a gun, gravity constantly pulls the bullet down toward
the ground and its acceleration, or the speed it falls to the ground, depends
on the latitudinal lines on the planet Earth. From either the North or South
Pole, as we approach the Equator, the speed gets slower and slower until it
reaches it minimum speed at the Equator of 32.0862 ft/s2. That effect and
its acceleration affect the bullet’s trajectory velocity, kinetic energy, and
momentum, transfer of energy, the maximum effective range, the maxi-
mum range of lethality, the maximum distance downrange and the depth
of penetration in a given target.
Gravity’s effect over time has the effect of modulating time through
compression. With the planet Earth in a constant state of rotation around
its axis, this modulation of the time plasma around its circumference has
a rotary motion pattern to it and an oscillation with a vector relationship
when we combine field-effect’s modulation with gravity’s modulation,
meaning both magnitude from gravity and direction from solar energy.
In addition, while the Earth’s gravitational pull compresses the time
plasma around its circumference, the Moon with its gravitational pull has
the opposite effect of decompressing the time plasma and the Sun, with
a far superior gravitational pull, causes a much stronger decompression
toward its direction.
With the Earth rotating around its axis, the Moon rotating around the
Earth, and both of them rotating around the Sun, there is a constant mov-
ing ridge or swell on the surface of the planet consisting of a compressing/
A Theory of the Effect of Gravity Over Time 101

decompressing magnitude of the plasma with the Sun’s solar energy of

expanding/contracting the plasma in a horizontal direction.
With the Sun’s solar effect over the direction of the time plasma and
the three sources of gravity’s (Earth, Moon, and Sun) effect over its mag-
nitude, we have a complex vector relationship of magnitude and direction.
We must remember, when dealing with precision calculations, the
effects of gravity over time and time of flight are important to consider,
particularly when dealing with great distances, ordinarily not a serious
problem in small arm ballistics.
CHAPTER 14

A THEORY OF THE EFFECT OF

FIELD-EFFECT OVER TRAJECTORY

CONTENTS

14.1 Introduction ................................................................................ 103

14.2 Conclusion ................................................................................. 104

14.1 INTRODUCTION

If we were to chronograph the muzzle velocity of a gun early in the morn-

ing – say, at seven o’clock – and again at two o’clock in the afternoon,
the muzzle velocity of the gun will be different each and every time, and
most likely a little higher the second time at two o’clock, depending on
the weather.
This phenomenon is due directly to the effect of the Sun warming the
air around the gun’s receiver and barrel. As the ambient temperature ele-
vates with a corresponding increase in temperatures inside of the cham-
ber and barrel before and after ignition, the gunpowder changes some of
its burning characteristics, namely the amount of time it takes to burn.
When it increases its burning speed, the time-pressure curve shortens – all
of which may increase the muzzle velocity, depending on the gunpowder
and the length of the barrel. If the gunpowder should burn too fast, due
to the increase in temperatures inside and outside of the gun, it may stop
burning long before the bullet leaves the barrel, giving a slightly lower
muzzle velocity and putting the bullet out of time as it leaves the barrel.
Remember! The bullet must leave the barrel at the precise moment the
104 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

gunpowder stops burning for optimum accuracy, and the rapid changes in
temperatures can easily knock it out of time.
Then, because the Sun also warms the air in the bullet’s flight path,
the air density decreases with each incremental increase in temperature,
producing both a higher and flatter trajectory velocity.
With a lower muzzle velocity at seven o’clock in the morning, there
will be of course a lower trajectory velocity and therefore a more parabolic
trajectory curve. At any given distance downrange, the bullet will also
impact higher on the target.
Then, at two o’clock in the afternoon, with a higher temperature, the
muzzle velocity and trajectory velocity will be higher. This increase in
both velocities, relative to the velocities at seven o’clock, will produce
a flatter trajectory. Impact on the target downrange will be a little lower.
Because the gun is also relatively “cold” on its first shot, it will shoot
even lower and slightly to the right of center in the Northern Hemisphere,
depending on the distance downrange, though we may not notice it except
at very long distances (see the coriolis effect), and to the left in the South-
ern Hemisphere. As the barrel warms with each successive shot, it will
take several shots for the barrel’s temperature to stabilize and finally for
us to locate its new shooting position (see A Theory of the Asymptotic
Function), usually and probably slightly just below the shooting position
of seven o’clock.

14.2 CONCLUSION

Naturally, in a real-time study of our physical environment, with a con-

stant change in field-effect and the Effect of Field-Effect Over Trajec-
tory, there will be constant and subtle changes in temperatures, damp air
densities, and barometric pressures – from the gun to the entire bullet’s
flight path.
So, muzzle velocity and trajectory velocity will go up and down con-
stantly throughout the day (see Figure 14.1); on the most part, how-
ever, unless these changes become dramatic and significant, we need not
worry about them. It only becomes important and significant when we
must shoot for extreme precision at long distances (most of us need not
A Theory of the Effect of Field-Effect Over Trajectory 105

Morning trajectory Afternoon trajectory

Baseline

FIGURE 14.1.

worry) starting from early morning and working through the afternoon.
Moreover, the coriolis effect also becomes critically important in these
calculations.
CHAPTER 15

THEORY, APPLICATION, AND

CALCULATION OF TRAJECTORY
IN REAL-TIME

CONTENTS

15.1 The Three Components of Drag................................................. 109

15.2 Total Drag Compression .............................................................113
15.3 Preliminary Conclusion ..............................................................114
15.4 A Computer Algorithm to Calculate LTTE .................................116

“In physics, the ballistic trajectory of a projectile is the path that a thrown
or launched projectile will take under the action of gravity, neglecting all
other forces, such as friction from air resistance, without propulsion. The
United States Department of Defense and NATO define a ballistic trajec-
tory as a trajectory traced after the propulsive force is terminated and the
body is acted upon only by gravity and aerodynamic drag.”
—Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

“The firearm was originally invented in China during the 13th century AD,
after the Chinese invented gunpowder during the 9th century AD. These
inventions were later transmitted to the Middle East, Africa, and Europe.
The world’s first firearm in history was the fire lance, the prototype of the
gun. The fire lance was invented in China during the 10th century and it is
the predecessor of all firearms.”
—Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
108 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

In the beginning of guns and ballistics – sometime between the 13th and
the 14th centuries, but well after the first “Fire Lance” in the 10th century
China – before we had finally realized bullets (or projectiles) travel in
a parabolic trajectory; we held the assumption, not aware of the effects
of the aerodynamic drags, gravity, and solar energy; that bullets travel in
a straight line; reach a maximum distance for a given gun and powder-
charge, and then abruptly drop to the ground – also in a straight line.
Later, when some ballisticians, gunners, and military ordnance special-
ists had begun to perceive the existence of a parabolic curve and flight
path, the inconsistencies and contradictions of the earlier assumptions of
those two straight lines compelled further research – the research which
incidentally continues today.
We were slow to recognize the effects of gravity and its relationships
to the bullet’s mass, momentum, kinetic energy, and velocity – as well as
to its trajectory.
In the 1830s, there was a recognition of the “coriolis effect” (see corio-
lis effect), the tendency of bullets to deflect to the right of the target in the
Northern Hemisphere and to the left in the Southern Hemisphere.
Between 1977 and 1979, during a series of experiments and observa-
tions at the Westfield Sportsman’s Club, we began to perceive field-effect
and it effect over a bullet’s flight path.
Field-effect deals with the effects of sunlight over the density of air,
time, time of flight, and the three components of drag induced by the trans-
fer of energy from the bullet to each increment of the bullet’s penetra-
tion in its flight path; drag induced by the surface area of the nose and
drag induced by the surface area of the cylinder. The base does not create
drag; the trueness of its roundness in its manufacturing process, however,
determines the design limitations of its accuracy in flight. Analogous to
automobile tires, the greater the roundness of the tires, the greater is the
mileage we can obtain within the design limitations of its material.
Once ballisticians began to perceive the concept of parabolic flight and
trajectory, there was almost a continuous struggle, from a variety of sources
all over the world, in several scientific disciplines, to develop methods and
mathematical formulas to calculate trajectory within a reasonable accuracy.
In the end, there were some genuinely number-crunching computations that
only a computer – at first an analog computer before and during World War
Theory, Application, and Calculation of Trajectory in Real-Time 109

II, and then a digital computer – could perform satisfactorily save for field
artillery, ships and coastal guns. Microcomputers came much later.
For small arm ballistics, those methods were cumbersome and pain-
fully unrealistic. In no way could we run around with a several hundred
pound analog computer on top of a rifle or handgun. Until recently, even
the thought of mounting a ballistic computer on a rifle was out of the ques-
tion. The technology was just not available! Now it is a “piece of cake.”
To be successful, we needed to know the bullet’s “ballistic coefficient”
[“a measure of its ability to overcome air resistance in flight”– Wikipedia,
the free encyclopedia]; the height of the sight above the center of the bore;
the bullet’s muzzle velocity and all of its velocities at each interval of com-
putation (usually at every 100 yards or 100 meters); drop of the bullet from
the line of departure from the center of the bore; bullet’s time of flight at
each interval; bullet’s path from line of sight; distance of each interval;
distance from muzzle to sighting “zero;” drop from bore at a range equal
to the sighting “zero;” and drop from bore at the target.
These computations were useful only at relatively short distances,
namely just a few hundred yards. With some exceptions, these computa-
tions were based only on 100 yard (or 100 meter) intervals. At the first 100
yards, the computations were rarely more than 90% accurate; however, by
the time they got out to 500 yards, their accuracy would be rarely more than
60%. With a 40% drop in accuracy, it is agonizingly obvious we would
need a much better system of computing trajectory. To get anywhere near
90% accuracy at 500 yards, we would need to compute – not in intervals
– but in increments of cubic inches, or in other equally suitable units of
measurement. With 3,600 increments of cubic inches for every 100 yards,
that means 3,600 separate sets of computations or 18,000 separate sets of
computations out to 500 yards. Unless we have an exceptional capability
in mental mathematics, we would need to use a high-speed microcomputer.

15.1 THE THREE COMPONENTS OF DRAG

In Figure 15.1, we can clearly illustrate the first component of drag –

transfer of energy. Transfer of energy (TE) is the product of kinetic energy
(KE) and air density (ϭ) where
110 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

Kinetic Energy (KE)

Bullet Spin Bullet passing through a cubic inch of air

and transferring an increment of KE in it

FIGURE 15.1

TE = KE × ϭ (1)

When we increase the bullet’s velocity, we increase the bullet’s kinetic

energy and therefore the amount of kinetic energy it can transfer into
every increment of the bullet’s flight path and then into the target when
it reaches it.
If we increase the air density in the bullet’s flight path, on the other
hand, we increase the transfer of energy going into each increment of air,
from the bullet, and therefore reduce the bullet’s remaining velocity and
kinetic energy as it travels into the next increment of penetration.
If the air density decreases, though, principally due to an increase of
ambient temperature, the transfer of energy decreases with a correspond-
ing increase in the bullet’s remaining velocity and kinetic energy as it trav-
els into the next increment of penetration and, eventually, the target.
Of course, during periods of little sunlight, the winter, or during the
nighttime, the air density would have to be much greater than in bright
sunlight of the daytime to cause a greater transfer of kinetic energy into
each increment of penetration in the bullet’s flight path. This increase in
air density would have to affect the bullet’s trajectory velocity, as well as
the muzzle velocity, to reduce the amount of kinetic energy available when
it strikes the target.
Theory, Application, and Calculation of Trajectory in Real-Time 111

We need to know the remaining bullet velocity at each interval down-

range in order to calculate its flight path and trajectory. That requires us to
identify and calculate every component of drag from the muzzle to each
interval. As stated above, the first component of drag is the transfer of energy.
We need to calculate that transfer of energy from the bullet into each
increment of penetration before we can go any further.
This method is the Little Method (LTTE) and actually a function of
integrated calculus:
n=∞
LTTE = Lim ʃ Σ [pΔKE – ΔKE x Δơ)] (2)
MV→ξ

where LTTE = the loss of kinetic energy in the bullet through the transfer
of energy in each increment of penetration in the bullet’s flight path. pΔKE
= the preceding increment of kinetic energy in the bullet’s flight. ΔKE =
the kinetic energy available in the increment of penetration.
LTTE means the “Loss through Transfer of Energy.” Take the first
increment of penetration immediately in front of the muzzle to calculate
the transfer of energy by multiplying the first increment of air density by
the bullet’s kinetic energy at the muzzle. Once done, then go to the second
increment of penetration, and so on, until you will have completed all
computations to the first interval of 100 yards (or 100 meters).
Then, you can subtract that answer, which will be very small, from the
preceding increment of kinetic energy to get the loss of kinetic energy.
Do this 3,600 times for every interval of 100 yards to get the remaining
velocity in the bullet’s trajectory. But, to be most accurate, you must also
include the other two components of drag.
Nose drag compression (Np) is the second component of drag and rep-
resents the drag induced by the surface area of the nose.
_______
√SA2 x V2
Np = ———— (3)
K

where Np = drag compression of the nose surface area (lb/cu./in.); SA

= surface area of the bullet’s nose (sq.in.); V = bullet’s forward velocity
112 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

(fps) in a given increment of penetration in the bullet’s flight path. K = 1,

964,636.542 for bullets 100 grains or greater in weight and 19,646,365.42
for bullets less than 100 grains in weight.
As the bullet moves downrange, it compresses the air in front of the
nose and around its cylinder.
So, the degree or amount of compression depends directly on the sur-
face area of the nose directly in front of the bullet – for any given value of
velocity. The greater the surface area, the greater is the compression we
will find in front of the bullet.
When we increase velocity, we increase drag compression. It is this
drag compression in front of the nose responsible for helping to slow down
the bullet in each increment of it flight path – from increment to increment.
It has nothing to do with the transfer of energy or the velocity of the
transfer of energy. There is always transfer of energy; however, the rate of
the bullet’s deceleration depends on the actual configuration of the bullet,
but namely, its frontal and cylinder surface areas.
Actual configuration will not affect transfer of energy, either; this is
because the transfer of energy is the product of the bullet’s kinetic energy
and the air’s density in the flight path, not drag compression.
Nevertheless, bullet configuration will most definitely affect the rate of
deceleration through the two drag compressions.
Once we compute the value of transfer of energy, we proceed to calcu-
late the effect of the nose’s frontal surface area over drag compression, in
order to add its value to the value of the transfer of energy, so that we can
determine the total drag responsible for the rate of deceleration.
But we have one more major component of drag to add in our calcula-
tion of the rate of deceleration and the value of velocity at any given incre-
ment or interval downrange in order to determine the bullet’s remaining
lethality.
Cylinder drag compression (Cp) is the third and last component of bul-
let drag. It has the same effect over the rate of deceleration as nose drag
compression with one single exception – the amount of the effect.
_______
3√SA2 x V2
Cp = ————— (3)
K
Theory, Application, and Calculation of Trajectory in Real-Time 113

15.2 TOTAL DRAG COMPRESSION

Total drag compression usually begins with a large difference between the
effect of Np over the effect of Cp by an enormous 90% with bullets greater
than 100 grains in weight and 68% with bullets less than 100 grains in
weight. Cp is always substantially greater than Np.
However, as the bullet moves downrange, this ratio slowly increases
with each successive increment of penetration into its flight path with 97%
for bullets greater than 100 grains in weight and 85.3% for bullets less than
100 grains in weight – at 500 yards.
With bullets greater than 100 grains in weight, Cp is approximately
11 times greater than Np; as the bullets move downrange to 500 yards,
with Np staying almost constantly the same value with each increment of
penetration, the Cp constantly increases with each successive increment of
penetration until it becomes in excess of 34.5 times greater than Np.
With bullets less than 100 grains in weight, however, Cp is approxi-
mately 3.4 times greater than Np at the muzzle, and gradually increases to
a value of 6.8 times greater than Np at 500 yards.
Drag compression, due to the surface area of the nose (Np) and the
surface area of the cylinder (Cp), rapidly drops with the drop in velocity at
each increment in the bullet’s flight path.
With bullets 100 grains or more in weight, the difference between Np
and Cp at the muzzle is approximately 69.5% and drops down to 45.4%
at 500 yards.
While, on the other hand, the difference between Np and Cp with bul-
lets less than 100 grains in weight, at the muzzle, is 59.7% and drops down
to 21.5% at 500 yards.
Apparently, the ratio between Np and Cp, as it grows successively
smaller with each increment of penetration, increases the cylinder drag
compression, which grows progressively greater, in respect to the nose
compression, and begins to cause a more significant influence at lower
velocities, particularly below the speed of sound.
We believe, once the bullet drops below the speed of sound (approxi-
mately 1130 fps at sea level), if it has a boat-tail configuration, the effect
of this configuration is to cause a significant reduction in the cylinder
drag compression, effectuating the effect of reducing the length and
114 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

therefore the total surface areas of the cylinder and cylinder drag com-
pression. This phenomenon of a boat-tail configuration seems to have the
effect of causing the bullet to lose velocity at an even slower rate once
it will have dropped below the speed of sound; this is the reason behind
the common use of boat-tail configurations among competitors and in the
military services.

15.3 PRELIMINARY CONCLUSION

Larger bullets with greater length, diameter, and weight, for any given
velocity, lose velocity at a slower rate than smaller bullets with shorter
lengths, smaller diameters, and lesser weights due to the ratio between
nose drag compression and cylinder drag compression, and probably due
to the ratio of the cylinder’s mass to the mass of the bullet’s nose.
A boat-tail configuration seems to have the effect of reducing the total
surface area of the bullet’s cylinder and therefore the effect of reduc-
ing cylinder drag compression when the bullet drops below the speed of
sound.
When a bullet leaves the barrel, it automatically goes into a state of
deceleration, principally due to the transfer of energy from the bullet to the
first increment of penetration in its flight path.
Then, the actual configuration of the bullet determines the rate of
deceleration, which successively diminishes with each successive drop in
velocity.
Whether a bullet of a .17 caliber, leaving the barrel at a remarkable
velocity of 4,100 fps, or a .50 caliber bullet leaving the barrel at 2,750
fps, it cannot reach or pass beyond 600 yards before it will have run out
of lethality if we were to believe Major General Julian Hatcher (June 26,
1888–December 4, 1963) in his “Hatcher’s Notebook”.
According to his studies on the science of ballistics between World
War I and World War II, he drew the conclusion that it takes about 60 ft/lbs
of kinetic energy to effectively kill a man. Kinetic energy is the lethality
in the bullet that kills or causes destruction to our bodies or property. Our
studies have determined that no bullet between the .17 caliber and the .50
caliber can survive pass 600 yards and still maintain that level of lethality
Theory, Application, and Calculation of Trajectory in Real-Time 115

of 60 ft/lbs. Yet, there are literally hundreds of documented accounts of

military snipers killing enemy soldiers well beyond 600 yards. Obviously,
60 ft/lbs is not the real threshold of lethality and/or, apparently, it depends
on the actual circumstances, such as field-effect in the bullet’s flight path
causing the bullet to travel substantially beyond 600 yards to carry more
than 60 ft/lbs of kinetic energy.
Beyond that magic range of 60 ft/lbs at 600 yards, the bullet may con-
tinue to travel for a considerable distance and still carry enough lethality
to effectively kill a man.
In fact, it may travel for miles if we were to raise the barrel to a sig-
nificant angle, say 20 or 40 degrees; however, once it loses its forward
momentum due to the combination of transfer of energy, nose drag com-
pression and cylinder drag compression, it will simply drop in a long
curve, even possibly tumble in flight, if light enough, to eventually fall
to the Earth miles away from the original shooting site. If it should hit
anyone, it will lack sufficient kinetic energy, usually a small fraction of a
ft/lb, to be lethal but still may sting a little, particularly on the face, in the
way a BB may sting.
If, even now with a forward velocity, but well below the range of
lethality, as General Hatcher defined it, a bullet could continue to penetrate
living tissue to cause bloody and painful damage.
More than 80 years ago, he mounted a .30 caliber machinegun on a
stable platform with the muzzle pointing straight up in the air. With a
pair of binoculars and several miles of open space, later water in a small
pond, while operating in an underground bunker, he repeatedly fired the
machinegun and waited for the bullets to strike the ground or water. He
reported feeling deep frustration in his powerlessness to spot or find
them striking the ground or water. Apparently, the bullets would reach a
maximum elevation several hundred yards up in the air to follow a long
shallow curve to his right, pursuant to the Earth’s gravitational pull and
the Correlis Effect, to strike the Earth many, many miles away from his
shooting site.
Earth’s rotation and the Correlis Effect will guarantee that the bullets
will not fall anywhere near his shooting site and, most likely without spe-
cial instrumentation, prove almost impossible for him to locate – putting
to death a lot of ancient theories.
116 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

15.4 A COMPUTER ALGORITHM TO CALCULATE LTTE

What follows is the mathematical algorithm to support a computer pro-

gram to calculate the loss of both the bullet’s kinetic energy and velocity
through transfer of energy in each increment of penetration in the bullet’s
flight path, including loss through nose drag and cylinder drag compres-
sion with an automatic compensation and correction for a given bullet
weight. It was written originally in 1990 using the Basic language.

ALGORITHM 1

100 Print “Loss through Transfer of Energy with automatic correction

of bullet weight”
110 Print: Input “Velocity at the muzzle = ___,” V
120 Print: Input “Bullet’s weight = ___,” W
130 Print: Input “Distance in inches = ____,” Inches
140 DEFDBL P, S: CLS
150 K = ((W/225218) * V^2) / 2
160 T = ((W/225218) * V^2) / 2
170 E = T-(T * .0000509)
180 A = 1964636.542^ (1/2)
190 H = 1964636.542^ (1/2)
200 DEFDBL J, S
210 IF W < 100 THEN GOTO 370
220 FOR I =1 TO INCHES
230 Y = SQR ((2*K) / (W/225218))
240 J = (H/(Y^ (1/2) /.0000509 ^ (1/2))) ^2
250 S = (A/(Y^ (1/2) /.0000509 ^ (1/2))) ^2
260 P = ((S * ((SQR ((2 * K) / (W / 225218))))) / 1964636.542)
270 Z = ((J * ((SQR ((2 * K) / (W / 225218))))) / 19646365.42)
280 O = E * P + Z
290 K = T – O: T = K
300 O = E * P + Z
310 K = T – O
Theory, Application, and Calculation of Trajectory in Real-Time 117

320 LOCATE 12, 35: PRINT I

330 NEXT I
340 LOCATE 12: PRINT I, Y, K, P
350 PRINT CHR$(7)
360 END
370 FOR I – 1 TO INCHES
380 Y = SQR ((2 * K) / (W / 225218))
390 S = (A / (Y ^ (1/2) / .0000509 ^ (1 /2))) * 3
400 P = ((S ^2 * Y ^2) ^ (1/3)) / 1964636.542
410 J = (A / (Y ^ (1/2) / .0000509 ^ (1/2))) * 3
420 Z = ((J ^ 2 * Y ^2) ^ (1/3)) / 19646365.42
430 O = E * P + Z
440 K = T – O: T = K
450 O = E * P + Z
460 K = T – 0: T = K
470 O = E * P + Z
480 K = T – O
490 LOCATE 12, 35: PRINT I
500 NEXT I
510 LOCATE 12: PRINT I, Y, K, P
520 PRINT CHR$(7): END
530 END

The above computer algorithm and program will not calculate, com-
pute, or measure a bullet’s trajectory; but it will provide the critical steps
toward the calculation and prediction of trajectory with additional algo-
rithms. LTTE is an important tool to calculate the loss of velocity and
kinetic energy at every increment of the bullet’s penetration in its flight
path. Once we can calculate and predict the remaining velocity at any
given interval, starting at 100 yards, etc., we can then either draw a trajec-
tory curve on a piece of draft paper or display trajectory almost in real-
time on a computer screen.

D =  2 Vf / MV  (64.32 × T 2 ) (4)
118 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

where D = Drop from bore (inches); MV = Muzzle Velocity (fps); Vf =

Velocity at the first interval (such as 100 yards) in fps; T = Time of flight
(seconds).
When a bullet leaves the bore, it immediately drops a little relative to
the center of the bore. The above equation calculates that drop.
Before we can go any further with our calculations, we must calculate
the bullet’s time of flight to the first interval, such as 100 yards.

R
T= (5)
( MV + Vf ) / 2

where R = Distance from muzzle to target (feet); MV = Muzzle Velocity

(fps); Vf = Velocity at the first interval (fps).
Then, with the above calculation completed, we can continue to calcu-
late the height of the bullet from the baseline – an imaginary line starting
from the center of the bore to the center of the target. Because a bullet’s
trajectory or flight path tends to be either above or below the baseline,
we need to know only its exact position at each interval (100, 200, 300
yards, etc.) to draw an accurate line of trajectory, representing the bullet’s
flight path, from interval to interval on a sheet of paper. Or, with today’s
computer technology and the available software, we can easily program a
computer to display a line of trajectory on its screen. To complete those
calculations, however, we must use the following equation:
In the following equation, we calculate the time of flight from muzzle
to each interval (100 yards, etc.) in order to calculate the drop from the
center of the bore to each interval.

R 
Pb =  ( Rs + H ) − ( Df + H ) (6)
 Rs 
where Pb = Bullet path from line of sight (inches); R = Distance from
muzzle to target (feet); Rs = Distance from muzzle to sighting zero (feet);
H = Height of scope (or open sight) from center of the sight or scope to
the center of the bore (inches); Df = Drop from bore at the target (inches).
Then, we calculate the position of the bullet at each interval, either
above or below the baseline. When we finish all calculations at each
Theory, Application, and Calculation of Trajectory in Real-Time 119

interval and compile all data, we draw a line of trajectory on a sheet of

graph paper or program a computer to do the work for us.
We will find a computer infinitely easier and much, much faster. While
in near real-time, a computer today can instantly display a growing line of
trajectory as it computes the data points at each increment and calculates
the bullet drop at each interval.
When we first started to develop this method of computation in the late
1980s, it took almost 30 minutes with the Radio Shack TRS-80 pocket
computer to calculate LTTE out to 100 yards without the additional com-
putations of the other two components of drag. Within a few months of
constant usage, we successfully burned out that pocket computer.
The Tandy 2000 microcomputer took almost 20 minutes to do the same
thing using MS-DOS 2.11 as the operating system with an 80186 proces-
sor at about 8 MHz.
When the 80386 microcomputer became available, we increased our
speed of computations to about 9 minutes for every 100 yards.
With the 80486 33MHz microcomputer, the speed of computations
jumped to approximately 9 seconds for every 100 yards.
CHAPTER 16

WIND DEFLECTION

CONTENTS

Keywords .............................................................................................. 121

Wind deflection – the deflection of a projectile resulting from the effects of

wind.”
—The Free Dictionary by Farlex

After taking into consideration all the variables responsible for accuracy,
we must still include the calculation of wind deflection in order to hit the
target downrange – particularly at extreme long distances.
Wind deflection (Dw) takes the following mathematical expression:

Dw = Vw [t – (R/MV)] (1)

where Dw = wind deflection (inches); Vw = velocity of 90° cross-wind

(inches per second); t = time of flight (seconds); MV = muzzle velocity
(fps); R = distance downrange from muzzle to target (feet).

KEYWORDS

• cross-wind
• muzzle velocity
• wind deflection
CHAPTER 17

AIR DENSITY IN REAL-TIME

“The density of air, ρ (Greek: rho) (air density), is the mass per unit vol-
ume of Earth’s atmosphere. Air density, like air pressure, decreases with
increasing altitude. It also changes with variation in temperature or
humidity. At sea level and at 15°C, air has a density of approximately
1.225 kg/m3 (0.001225 g/cm3, 0.0023769 slug/ft3, 0.0765 lbm/ft3) accord-
ing to ISA (International Standard Atmosphere).
The air density is a property used in many branches of science as aero-
nautics; gravimetric analysis; the air-conditioning industry; atmospheric
research and meteorology; the agricultural engineering in their modeling
and tracking of Soil-Vegetation-Atmosphere-Transfer (SVAT) models; and
the engineering community that deals with compressed air from industry
utility, heating, dry and cooling process in industry like a cooling towers,
vacuum and deep vacuum processes, high pressure processes, the gas and
light oil combustion processes that power our turbine-powered airplanes,
gas turbine-powered generators and heating furnaces, and air condition-
ing from deep mines to space capsules.”
—Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In the calculation of trajectory in real-time, as discovered in the chapter

on “Theory, Application and calculation of Trajectory in real-time,” we
used the “Little Method” (LTTE) – based on the relationship of transfer of
energy to kinetic energy and air density – to calculate trajectory (with the
other two components of drag).
We also discovered the use of ordinary dry air density to be entirely
adequate, and surprisingly accurate, most of time in most situations, even
at moderately long distances.
124 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

However, as we have learned in the chapter on The Effect of Field-

Effect Over Trajectory, we must use damp air density in real-time to accu-
rately calculate field-effect in real-time.

, 70.56  29.92 ( e ) 
 − hy

Od (1)
53.3 ( 460 + T  F )
1728

where ơd = damp air density (lbs/cubic inch); h = constant: 0.00003158; y

= elevation above sea level (feet); T° F = temperature (Fahrenheit).
The subexpression, 29.92 (e-hy), represents the equation to calculate the
uncorrected barometric pressure (UBP), where

UBP = 29.92 (e–hy)

Thus, as stated in an earlier chapter, the equation to calculate damp air

density does indeed contain barometric pressure as a variable.
Ordinarily, dry air density of 0.0000509 pounds per cubic inch is more
than reasonably accurate in the calculation of a bullet’s trajectory at short
ranges – say, 300 yards. However, at longer distances, it will become very
important to include the calculation of damp air density when dealing with
the requirement of extreme precision or working in a very moist environ-
ment, such as in the case of rainfall. A moist environment will, of course,
counter-intuitively, always provide for a lower air density with a higher
velocity in the bullet’s flight path at every increment of penetration, and
that will change shot placements and produce larger groups.
When we shoot for groups in rain, such as in a competitive event, even
at short distances, such as 100 to 300 yards, it will prove a real challenge
with most calibers smaller than a .50 caliber. Groups get erratic and unre-
liable. Sometimes, it would be better for us to shoot at a barn! Now, seri-
ously, ordinarily, shooting at a man or a moose in rain works as long as we
do not expect a tight group.
The relationship between mass and volume, with moisture – almost
always the case in most environments – will make the air density smaller
than dry air density due to the moisture’s effect of reducing density;
because the molar mass of water (the ratio of the mass of a given substance
Air Density in Real-Time 125

to the amount of substance) is less than the molar mass of dry air. That
automatically reduces density, and that affects a bullet’s trajectory. Using
dry air density as one of the variables in the calculation of trajectory will
ordinarily produce completely negligible errors at short distances. When
dealing with a requirement for much greater accuracy and precision, then,
of course, we would have to include the value of damp air density, which
is normally the common issue in an outside environment.
CHAPTER 18

THE SPEED OF SOUND IN AIR

“The speed of sound is the distance travelled per unit of time by a sound
wave propagating through an elastic medium. In dry air at 20°C (68°F),
the speed of sound is 343.2 meters per second (1,126 ft/s). This is 1,236
kilometers per hour (667 kn; 768 mph), or a kilometer in 2.914 seconds or
a mile in 4.689 seconds.”
—Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Over these many centuries there have been many, many attempts to mea-
sure the velocity of sound, and perhaps, it was Sir Isaac Newton (Decem-
ber 25, 1642–March 20, 1726/7) who, for the first time, successfully
computed the speed of sound in air as 979 feet per second, approximately
within 15% of the true value. However, he failed to perceive or, if he
did, neglected to measure the effect of fluctuating and unpredictable tem-
peratures with the change in elevation and climate. It was Pierre-Simon,
marquis de Laplace (March 23, 1749–March 5, 1827) who corrected that
problem.
It took awhile before the scientific community began to perceive that
sound travels at different velocities in different mediums, whether in a gas
(air), a liquid (water) or a solid (concrete).
Throughout the 17th century, there were several significant attempts to
measure the speed of sound more accurately. People such Marin Mersenne
(September 8, 1588–September 1, 1648) in 1630, Pierre Gassendi (Janu-
ary 22, 1592–October 24, 1655) in 1635, and Robert Boyle (January 25,
1627–December 31, 1691) came much closer than their earlier peers.
Then, in 1709, Reverend William Derham (November 26, 1657–April
5, 1735), the Rector of Upminster, England, published a much more accu-
rate measurement of the speed of sound. His method was unique. He used
128 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

a telescope in the tower of the church of St. Laurence in Upminster, Eng-

land, to measure the time it took for a flash from a distant shotgun until he
heard the report of that shotgun with a half second pendulum. Then, sev-
eral more measurements were made using shotguns, shooting from several
different local landmarks, including the North Ockendon church, using
triangulation to measure the speed.

Vs= 2400(460 + T o F) (1)

where Vs = speed of sound in air (fps); T°F = temperature of air (°F).

CHAPTER 19

APPROXIMATE TIME OF FLIGHT

“Time of flight (TOF) describes a variety of methods that measure the

time that it takes for an object, particle or acoustic, electromagnetic or
other wave to travel a distance through a medium. This measurement can
be used for a time standard (such as an atomic fountain), as a way to
measure velocity or path length through a given medium, or as a way to
learn about the particle or medium (such as composition or flow rate).
The traveling object may be detected directly (e.g., ion detector in mass
spectrometry) or indirectly (e.g., light scattered from an object in laser
doppler velocimetry).”
—Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In any calculation of the time of flight, we will soon realize that it can
only be approximate in its trajectory. This system does not consider the
effect of field-effect over time or the effect of field-effect over air density
or transfer of energy and, subsequently, as well as all aerodynamic drag
compression characteristics in the shapes and surface areas of a bullet.
Nevertheless, it is accurate enough for most of us in the shooting com-
munity.

Ds
t= (1)
(MV + ξ ) / 2

where t = approximate time of flight (seconds); Ds = distance from muzzle

to target (feet); MV = muzzle velocity (fps); ξ = initial terminal velocity
(fps).
CHAPTER 20

MAXIMUM RANGE OF LETHALITY

“Lethality or deadliness is how capable something is of causing death. Most

often it is used when referring to chemical weapons, biological weapons, or
their chemical components. The use of this term denotes the ability of these
weapons to kill, but also the possibility that they may not kill. Reasons for
the lethality of a weapon to be inconsistent, or expressed by percentage, can
be as varied as minimized exposure to the weapon, previous exposure to the
weapon minimizing susceptibility, degradation of the weapon over time and/
or distance, and incorrect deployment of a multi-component weapon.”
—Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

“Stopping power is the ability of a firearm or other weapon to cause

enough ballistic trauma to a target (human or animal) to immediately
incapacitate (and thus stop) the target. This contrasts with lethality in that
stopping power pertains only to a weapon’s ability to incapacitate quickly,
regardless of whether death ultimately occurs.
Stopping power is related to the physical properties of the bullet, but
the issue is complicated and not easily studied. Although higher caliber
has traditionally been widely associated with higher stopping power, the
physics involved are multifactorial, with caliber, muzzle velocity, bullet
mass, bullet shape, and bullet material all contributing. Critics contend
that the importance of “one-shot stop” statistics is overstated, pointing
out that most gun encounters do not involve a “shoot once and see how
the target reacts” situation.
Stopping power is usually caused not by the force of the bullet but by
the damaging effects of the bullet, which are typically a loss of blood, and
with it, blood pressure. This is why in many instances a single gunshot
wound (GSW), with slow blood loss, does not stop the victim immediately.
More immediate effects can result when a bullet damages parts of the
132 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

central nervous system, such as the spine or brain, or when hydrostatic

shock occurs. The importance (or lack thereof) of hydrostatic shock and of
momentum transfer in determining stopping power has long been contro-
versial among gun users. Some have ascribed great importance to hydro-
static shock; some have tried to entirely discount it; the truth is somewhere
in between. Not every GSW produces it.”
—Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

An examination of lethal energy or kinetic energy in a bullet in Wikipedia,

as well as other sources, will readily reveal an enormous interest on the
subject by the military armed services, big-game hunters, and even foren-
sic pathologists. There are even individuals writing letters on blogs asking
for a definitive answer to these questions plus a mathematical formula or
some other method of analysis for them to take to the field.
The problem with this subject is the proper definition of lethality, in
this context of small arm ballistics, together with the enormous complex-
ity of calculating it.
Generally speaking, because it is kinetic energy that represents the
lethality in a bullet, the heavier the bullet or the greater the velocity, the
greater is the lethality. Then, there is that complexity in the design of the
bullet. It can have all the lethality we need; but if we design it incorrectly,
it will fail to work properly, which happens all the time.
A little more than 30 years ago, there was an experiment using different
weights of different bullets at different velocities with approximately the
same level of lethal kinetic energy.
With a pile of wooden pine dowels of various diameters, several recre-
ational shooters set up a test to determine the effectiveness of lethal pen-
etration going through those dowels (Figure 20.1). Starting off with a .22
caliber bullet and working up to a .50 caliber, they shot a round of each
caliber into those wooden dowels to see what would happen.
Immediately, the pattern became clear and really intuitive for most of
us even before the experiment had started. The lighter 52 grain .22 caliber
bullets, the same spitzer bullets we used in the original M-16, would par-
tially penetrate the wooden dowels before reflecting off to another direc-
tion to strike another wooden dowel, causing each dowel to split, break,
or splinter before the bullet ran out energy and stopped entirely. Its path
Maximum Range of Lethality 133

Heavier Bullet
Light Bullet .50 caliber
.22 caliber

FIGURE 20.1

of penetration was unpredictable and zigzagged through only part of the

wooden structure, perhaps following a path of “lease resistance.”
When the experimenters continued with the 150 grain .30 caliber bullet,
it also followed an unpredictable and zigzagged course but in a straighter
line of splitting and splintering dowels before running out of energy a little
further down the wooden dowel structure.
Finally, with the heavier 500 grain .50 caliber, the bullet reflected a
little to the left and a little to the right of its original path to break, split,
and splinter the dowels, but continued in a relatively straight line before
penetrating the structure entirely.
The lead core separated from the copper jacket of the .22 caliber bullet,
leaving pieces of itself into some of the wooden dowels. Though seriously
distorted, that did not happen with the .30 caliber bullet and the .50 caliber
bullet rested with only a few scratch marks on the surface area of its nose.
All the bullets were full metal jackets.
What we have is clear evidence that lethal kinetic energy is not enough
to make a bullet successful in its mission. All bullet weights were well
beyond lethality when they struck the wooden dowels. To be successful,
134 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

we must design and use the correct bullet for a given mission. We can
change its weight; change its diameter; change its velocity; alter its con-
figuration with different alloys and jackets; or change its core density from
a lead alloy to something such as depleted uranium or tungsten carbide.
Needless to say, we are stuck with a given gun and caliber with severe
limitations. Changing a bullet’s diameter is not usually an option except,
possibly, for the military budgets with the objective to identify, develop,
and employ a weapon system to defeat a hardened target such as a tank
or bunker. Ordinarily, members of the hunting community are more con-
cerned with the caliber and bullet to defeat a particular game animal, such
as something very large and dangerous, than with “hardened targets.”
They are particularly concerned with the range of lethality of a given
gun and its ammunition. The following algorithm is part of a bigger com-
puter program, originally written in 1990–1991 in Basic, using the 80186
and later the 80286 microcomputer, stored on several 5¼ inch floppy dis-
kettes stored in one of 14 filing cabinets. It is one of many modules and
part of a 14,000 line computer program to support a “Spectroanalytic” pro-
gram on ballistics. We are no longer able to run this program on any of our
computers today, because all those formats are incompatible to the present
formats in use. Fortunately, we have several hundred pages of “hard cop-
ies” of dozens of algorithms, modules, and computer programs we can use
as backups for this book but without the ability to operate them from those
original formats.
The following Algorithm 2 will calculate, using the three components
of drag, the “Maximum Range of Lethality.” It is not perfect. However, it
will prove surprisingly accurate and reliable in the prediction of any bul-
let’s maximum range of lethality, from the .17 caliber to the .50 caliber,
but cannot predict or anticipate the rapid changes in the local climate, the
subtle changes in temperature and humidity, or the sudden appearance of
a cloud halfway downrange that out of the blue increases the air density,
the transfer of energy, the two components of drag compression, the slight
reduction in trajectory velocity, or the height of the bullet from the base-
line. Nevertheless, it will be remarkably accurate and useful to allow the
hunter, particularly, to determine whether he will have enough lethality
to effectively kill his game at a given distance. We must remember when
dealing with the calculation of such parameters in ballistics, with some
Maximum Range of Lethality 135

important exceptions, the algorithms is always mathematically intensive.

Until relatively recently, we did not even have the computing power to
make those computations for the consumer.
General Hatcher, as reported in an earlier chapter, said the minimum
amount of kinetic energy to effective kill a man was 60 ft/lbs, and NATO
reports it as 62.7 ft/lbs. Go to lines 370 and 380. When the program
reaches less than 60 ft/lbs of remaining kinetic energy in its calculations,
or any value we want, it stops to calculate and display the distance in
yards. For large game, such as a moose or bear, 200 ft/lbs seems more real-
istic, though certainly not definitive, and it is easy to change lines 370 and
380 when calculating the maximum range of lethality for those animals,
or for anything we want. From exhaustive research, there does not appear
to have been anything done on the minimum amount of kinetic energy to
effectively kill wild game.

ALGORITHM 2

100 Print : “Maximum Range of Lethality”

110 Print: Input “Muzzle Velocity (fps) = ____,” Y
120 Print: Input “Bullet Weight (grains) = ____,” W
130 Print: Input “Kinetic energy at the muzzle (ft/lbs) = ____,” T
140 Print: Input “Succeeding increment of kinetic energy (ft/lbs) =
____,” E
150 Count = 0
160 O = E * P
170 K = T – O
180 T = K
190 O = E * P : Y = SQR ((2*K) / W/225218)) : IF W < 100 THEN
GOTO 260
200 A = 196436.542 ^ (1/2)
210 S = (A/Y^ (1/2) /.0000509 ^ (1/2))) ^2 ‘NSA DRAG
220 P = SQR ((S^2)* ((SQR ((2*K) / (W/225218))) ^2)) /1964636.542
‘DRAG COMPRESSION
230 H = 19646365.42 ^ (1/2)
240 J = (H/Y ^ (1/2) /.0000509 ^1/2))) ^2 ‘CSA DRAG COMPRES-
SION
136 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

250 Z = SQR ((J^2) * ((SQR ((2 * K) / (W/225218))) ^ 2)) / 19646365.42

: GOTO 320
260 A = (1964636.542) ^ (1/2)
270 S = (A/Y ^ (1/2) / .0000509 ^ (1/2))) * 3 ‘NSA’DRAG
280 P = ((S ^ 2 * Y ^ 2) ^ (1/3)) / 1964636.542
290 H = 19646365.42 ^ (1/2)
300 J = (H/(Y^ (1/2) / .0000509 ^ (1/2))) * 3
310 Z = ((J ^2 * Y ^ 2) ^ (1/3)) / 19646365.42 ‘DRAG COMPRES-
SION
320 K = T – O
330 V = SQR ((2 * K) / (W/225218))
340 PRINT “Remaining Kinetic Energy = ______ (ft/lbs)
350 PRINT K
360 PRINT “Maximum Range of Lethality”
370 IF K > 60 THEN COUNT = COUNT + 1 : GOTO 160 ELSE 380
380 IF K = 60 THEN GOTO 390
390 DEFINT I : I = COUNT / 3600 * 100
400 PRINT “Maximum Range of Lethality = _____ yards”
410 PRINT I : PRINT CHR$(7)
420 END
Note: To obtain “succeeding increment of kinetic energy,” multiply the
kinetic energy at the muzzle by .0000509 (dry air density) [TE = KE x ơ]
to get the TE and then subtract that answer from the KE at the muzzle.
From there, you will get the remaining KE in the succeeding increment of
penetration of the bullet’s flight path.
CHAPTER 21

MAXIMUM EFFECTIVE RANGE

“The effective range (maximum effective range) of a weapon is the fur-

thest distance an effective shot can be taken with reasonable certainty that
it will hit. It is determined by a number of factors: type of cartridge fired,
inherent precision of the weapon, and volume of fire delivered.”
—Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

• Absolute maximum effective range: “This round is not consid-

ered lethal after crossing this threshold” distance. Neither of the
other two common “maximum range” values will be greater than
this. Purportedly, NATO defines this as the point at which the pro-
jectile’s kinetic energy dips below 85 joules (62.7 foot-pounds).
This is typically claimed when recounting that the P90’s effective
range is 400 meters on unarmored targets, as classified by NATO.
It’s worth noting that while the P90 looks neater than the civilian
PS90, the extra barrel length increases the muzzle velocity, and
thus, the civilian model actually has a longer absolute maximum
effective range.
• Maximum effective range on a point target: This is the maximum
range at which an average shooter can hit a human-sized target
50% of the time. “Point target” is basically a euphemism for hit-
ting a human torso-sized area in this context. If this range were
greater than the absolute maximum, the absolute maximum would
be quoted (a non-lethal hit may be accurate, but it’s not effective).
—Gun/Wiki
138 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

The maximum effective range is …“The maximum distance at which

a weapon may be expected to be accurate and achieve the desired effect.”
—The Free Dictionary by Farlex

It does not take much thought, research on the Internet, or elsewhere to

realize there is no definitive answer to the question: “What is Maximum
Effective Range?” In some sources, such as Wikia, the maximum effective
range is the “… further distance an effective shot can be taken with rea-
sonable certainty that it will hit …” the intended target.
In The Free Dictionary by Farlex, the maximum effective range is “…
at which a weapon may be expected to be accurate and achieve the desire
effect.”
Obviously, we have a problem, i.e., the problem of defining the maxi-
mum effective range of a particular gun and its ammunition.
In this thesis on the science of small arms ballistics, we shall define the
maximum effective range as the greatest distance a particular gun and its
ammunition can hold onto a group.
Discounting the differences in the proficiency of the shooter and the
psychological anticipation of felt recoil, plus the sheer physical and psy-
chological fatigue of a prolonged period of shooting a gun with heavy
recoil, recoil jump, and loud reports, we will confine ourselves to the
mechanics of the gun, its quality in workmanship, and the ballistics of
the ammunition, including the consistency of the burning characteristics
of the ignition system – the primer; the consistency of the dimensional
characteristics of the cartridge case; the quality and consistency of the
gunpowder and, of course, the quality and consistency of the bullet’s con-
struction. Hitting a target is no big deal. Hitting it consistently, shot after
shot, and holding a group at the same time is something entirely different
– and much more difficult.
One thing is certain: With all those variables, both physical and psycho-
logical, we would need a more definitive and decisive method of analysis.
All those variables make it virtually impossible to calculate and predict the
maximum effective range with any degree of reliability and consistency. In
fact, such a figure would prove meaningless in most instances.
Then, upon a closer examination of this issue, the answer to our ques-
tion becomes immediately obvious: – Because a bullet can only maintain
Maximum Effective Range 139

its stability in flight as long as it continues to fly about the speed of sound,
the threshold of instability is the moment its velocity drops below the speed
of sound. Then, the groups begin to lose their coherence, the heavier bul-
lets much more slowly than the lighter bullets.
It is also obvious, when we think it out in detail, many or most bul-
lets, particularly when we fire them from handguns and some rifles, are
inherently unable to maintain stability within a few feet of leaving the bar-
rel, even with the correct rate of twist for the bullet at the correct muzzle
velocity when it leaves the barrel below the speed of sound.
Experience has taught us the heavier bullets, for any trajectory veloc-
ity, lose velocity much more slowly than the lighter bullets. A good exam-
ple would be the .22 caliber Short. In handguns, it starts off well below
the speed of sound and quickly loses momentum to make the maximum
effective range not much more than 50 yards and, by the time it reaches
100 yards, maintaining a decent group will prove very difficult even for
the best marksman. Firing the same bullet in a high-quality rife would
prove only slightly superior beyond 50 yards but not much more effective
at 100 yards than with a handgun.
When we use a much heavier bullet (240 grains versus 40 grains), such
as the .44 Special from a handgun at 850 fps, though still substantially
below the speed of sound when it leaves the barrel, will easily provide
superiority over the .22 caliber Short. With groups no different at 50 yards,
tests after tests with the .44 caliber will provide much tighter groups at
100 yards than any .22 caliber bullet starting off with the same or greater
muzzle velocity (but below the speed of sound). Even with a short barrel
revolver of less than three inches, the .44 caliber will consistently hit a
target the size of a man at 100 yards with tighter groups than with the .22
caliber bullet. Of course, a good marksman can do the same thing with a
.22 caliber handgun with the only difference being larger groups at that
same distance.
What happens after the bullet drops below the speed of sound depends
on a huge variety of complex variables, everything from the marksman-
ship of the shooter to the amount of moisture in each increment of air
density of the bullet’s flight path.
We have a problem of definitively defining the maximum effective
range. We know the maximum effective range begins when the bullet’s
140 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

trajectory velocity drops below the speed of sound. We also know, although
it loses its coherence immediately, it can travel a considerable distance
before we will have realized we can no longer hold onto a group. The
most we can do, without extensive field experiments with each bullet, is to
use the LTTE method (see 15.4), with the subexpressions of the drag nose
compression and the drag cylinder compression, for surprising accuracy,
to calculate the distance downrange when the bullet’s predicted trajectory
velocity drops below the speed of sound.
Experience has taught us a bullet can travel an enormous distance with
serious lethality well beyond this threshold of prediction and still main-
tain a measure of coherence in its grouping individuality. This pattern of
dispersion is always the same with each bullet, regardless of its weight
or design. As it continues its movement downrange, after dropping below
the speed of sound, the coherence of its groups gets bigger and bigger
until the groups get too big to hit anything or it runs out of sufficient
trajectory velocity to maintain a forward course. Under normal ballistic
constraints, this means that any bullet of substantial weight and muzzle
velocity can easily travel for miles until it either hits something or falls
to the ground.
Below is Algorithm 3, a derivative of Algorithm 2. It uses the LTTE
method to calculate the loss of velocity and kinetic energy in the bullet’s
flight path through a calculation of the loss of kinetic energy through trans-
fer of energy, the first component of drag. Every time the bullet transfers
another increment of its remaining kinetic energy in an increment of air
in the bullet’s flight path, it loses an increment of its forward trajectory
velocity. Then, in this particular algorithm, it includes the subexpressions
of drag through nose compression and the drag through cylinder compres-
sion to provide greater accuracy, usually well above 90%.
In the instructions on lines 370 and 380, the program continues to cal-
culate the loss of velocity until the remaining velocity drops below the
speed of sound (1130 fps) (obviously an arbitrary figure because we will
almost never know the exact speed of sound in most instances) and then it
stops to calculate the distance in yards to represent the maximum effective
range.
Maximum Effective Range 141

ALGORITHM 3

100 Print : “Maximum Effective Range”

110 Print : Input “Muzzle Velocity (fps) = ______,” Y
120 Print : Input “Bullet Weight (grains) = ______,” W
130 Print : Input “Kinetic energy at the muzzle (ft/lbs) = ______,” T
140 Print : Input “Succeeding increment of kinetic energy (ft/lbs) =
_____,” E
150 Count = 0
160 O = E * P
170 K = T – O
180 T = K
190 O = E * P : Y = SQR ((2*K) / W/225218)) : IF W < 100 THEN
GOTO 260
200 A = 196436.542 ^ (1/2)
210 S = (A/Y^ (1/2) /.0000509 ^ (1/2))) ^2 ‘NSA DRAG
220 P = SQR ((S^2)* ((SQR ((2*K) / (W/225218))) ^2)) /1964636.542
‘DRAG COMPRESSION
230 H = 19646365.42 ^ (1/2)
240 J = (H/Y ^ (1/2) /.0000509 ^1/2))) ^2 ‘CSA DRAG COMPRES-
SION
250 Z = SQR ((J^2) * ((SQR ((2 * K) / (W/225218))) ^ 2)) / 19646365.42
: GOTO 320
260 A = (1964636.542) ^ (1/2)
270 S = (A/Y ^ (1/2) / .0000509 ^ (1/2))) * 3 ‘NSA’DRAG
280 P = ((S ^ 2 * Y ^ 2) ^ (1/3)) / 1964636.542
290 H = 19646365.42 ^ (1/2)
300 J = (H/(Y^ (1/2) / .0000509 ^ (1/2))) * 3
310 Z = ((J ^2 * Y ^ 2) ^ (1/3)) / 19646365.42 ‘DRAG COMPRESSION
320 K = T – O
330 V = SQR ((2 * K) / (W/225218))
340 PRINT “Remaining Kinetic Energy = _________(ft/lbs)
350 PRINT K
360 PRINT “Maximum Effective Range”
370 IF V > 1130 THEN COUNT = COUNT + 1 : GOTO 160 ELSE 380
380 IF V = 1130 THEN GOTO 390
142 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

390 DEFINT I : I = COUNT / 3600 * 100

400 PRINT “Maximum Effective Range = ______ yards”
410 PRINT I : PRINT CHR$(7)
420 END

Note: To obtain “succeeding increment of kinetic energy,” multiply the

kinetic energy at the muzzle by .0000509 (dry air density) [TE = KE x ơ]
to get the TE and then subtract that answer from the KE at the muzzle.
From there, you will get the remaining KE in the succeeding increment of
penetration of the bullet’s flight path.
CHAPTER 22

THE CORRELIS EFFECT

“The apparent deflection (Coriolis acceleration) of a body in motion with

respect to the earth, as seen by an observer on the earth, attributed to a
fictitious force (Coriolis force) but actually caused by the rotation of the
earth and appearing as a deflection to the right in the Northern Hemi-
sphere and a deflection to the left in the Southern Hemisphere.”
—Dictionary.com

“In physics, the Coriolis effect is a deflection of moving objects when the
motion is described relative to a rotating reference frame. In a reference
frame with clockwise rotation, the deflection is to the left of the motion of
the object; in one with counter-clockwise rotation, the deflection is to the
right. Although recognized previously by others, the mathematical expres-
sion for the Coriolis force appeared in an 1835 paper by French scientist
Gaspard-Gustave Coriolis, in connection with the theory of water wheels.
Early in the 20th century, the term Coriolis force began to be used in con-
nection with meteorology.”
—Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
144 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

In the science of small arms ballistics, the Correlis Effect, except for mili-
tary snipers and the serious long-distance competitive target shooters, is
of no importance to us. It is an important phenomenon to study when we
desire or need a more solid grasp of the science of ballistics, however.

“Gustave-Gaspard Coriolis, (born May 21, 1792, Paris – died Sept. 19,
1843, Paris), French engineer and mathematician who first described the
Coriolis force, an effect of motion on a rotating body, of paramount impor-
tance to meteorology, ballistics, and oceanography. An assistant professor
of analysis and mechanics at the École Polytechnique, Paris (1816–38),
he introduced the terms work and kinetic energy in their modern scien-
tific meanings in his first major book, Du calcul de l’effet des machines
(1829; ‘On the Calculation of Mechanical Action’), in which he attempted
to adapt theoretical principles to applied mechanics.’”
—Written by: The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica

Basically, in respect to the science of small arms ballistics, the Correlis

Effect is the phenomenon of the Earth’s rotation causing bullets to deflect
to the right of its aiming point in the Northern Hemisphere and to the
left in the Southern Hemisphere. In field artillery, coastal artillery, and
ship artillery, this phenomenon becomes extremely important if we want
to hit anything at great distances. A military combat ship, if it expects to
hit another ship in combat moving in any direction relative to itself, must
include the effect of the Correlis Effect in its calculations as well as the
calculations the enemy ship will have travelled by the time the projectile
reaches it.
In the army, shooting field artillery at an enemy emplacement at great
distances of several miles to more than 20 miles, although these enemy
emplacements may not move or move as fast as an enemy ship in sea,
it is still necessary to include in its calculations the effect of the Correlis
Effect in order to hit it. Otherwise, depending on the distance between the
artillery and the enemy emplacement, the projectiles could miss by miles.
In small arm ballistics, the Correlis Effect becomes important when
someone shoots a gun straight up in the air, but negligible at less than 1000
yards straight ahead. The bullets will lose forward velocity very quickly,
and it is very unlikely such bullets in small arm ballistics will travel more
The Correlis Effect 145

than a few hundred yards up in the air, at the very most, before it begins
to fall back to Earth.
Because of the Correlis Effect, however, in the Northern Hemisphere,
the bullets will deflect to the right as it falls and may take a consider-
able amount of time tumbling in flight (depending on its weight) before
it reaches ground several miles away from it origin and nowhere near its
aiming point.
This ignorance of the Correlis Effect in small arm ballistics can lead to
some interesting criminal endeavors. One particular and well-documented
account occurred about 20 years ago when a greedy real-estate property
developer, anxious to obtain ownership of approximately 170 acres of
underdeveloped land in use by a shooting and fishing club, tried to destroy
this club while thinking of himself as clever.
This club uses a small mountain, of at least 600 feet in height above the
height of the shooting range, as its backdrop to stop bullets from causing
harm to property and property owners on the other side of the mountain.
With a high-power rifle and several rounds of ammunition, he climbed
on top of the mountain to shoot down at houses and automobiles on the
opposite side.
He held the purpose of wanting to make it look as if people on the other
side shooting their guns in the shooting range were shooting a little too
high, subsequently causing the bullets to strike personal property on the
other side and with the potential of hitting children.
If true, sure enough, this would make the shooting range in the com-
munity very dangerous. Just think of the damage to personal property and
the anguish to the parents of young children if one should get shot.
However, this greedy real-estate developer made one crucial mistake.
He did not understand the physical phenomenon of the Correlis Effect in
small arm ballistics. If anyone were shooting a little too high at this range,
due to the Correlis Effect, the bullet could not possibly arrive on the oppo-
site side of the mountain directly in front of the shooter.
Remember General Hatcher’s experiments between the two world
wars? The .30 caliber bullets would go up several hundred feet to sev-
eral hundred yards in the air, depending on the bullets’ weight and trajec-
tory velocity, lose it forward velocity very quickly, and then slowly fall to
146 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

ground while deflecting to the right of the aiming point, possibly landing
several miles from the shooting position.
He then made a second crucial mistake. He made the mistake of talking
about people reporting seeing bullet holes in their cars and houses, when
not reported to the news media, and then expressing a burning desire to
purchase the land himself as soon as it becomes available for sale.
The land was never sold, and the shooting range is still very much
active today.
CHAPTER 23

TRUE MINUTE OF ANGLE

“The arcminute is commonly found in the firearms industry and lit-

erature, particularly concerning the accuracy of rifles, though the
industry refers to it as minute of angle. It is especially popular with
shooters familiar with the Imperial measurement system because
1 MOA subtends approximately one inch at 100 yards, a traditional
distance on target ranges. Since most modern rifle scopes are adjust-
able in half (½), quarter (¼), or eighth ( 1/8 ) MOA increments, also
known as clicks, this makes zeroing and adjustments much easier. For
example, if the point of impact is 3” high and 1.5” left of the point of
aim at 100 yards, the scope needs to be adjusted 3 MOA down, and 1.5
MOA right. Such adjustments are trivial when the scope’s adjustment
dials have an MOA scale printed on them, and even figuring the right
number of clicks is relatively easy on scopes that click in fractions of
MOA.”
—Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The minute of angle is the unit of measurement to measure a gun’s accu-

racy, usually rifles. Typically, under perfect or controlled conditions,
with the gun mounted on a bench-rest, without or with minimal wind, to
remove any possibility of a shooter’s error, we use one minute of angle
as the benchmark of accuracy. That means, if the rifle can shoot a group
of one inch at 100 yards, it is arbitrated as a precision rifle. Some firearm
manufactures advertise some of their precision rifles shoot groups smaller
than one minute of angle at 100 yards, however,
148 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

  Group  
MOA = 60 Tan −1  (1)
  Ds  

where Group = size of group (inches); Ds = distance between gun and

target (inches).
SECTION THREE
CHAPTER 24

THE SCIENCE OF TERMINAL

BALLISTICS

CONTENTS

24.1 Definition ................................................................................... 152

“Terminal ballistics, (also known as wound ballistics) a sub-field of bal-

listics, is the study of the behavior and effects of a projectile when it hits its
target and transfers its energy to the target. Bullet design and the velocity
of impact determine the effectiveness of its impact.
“The study of terminal ballistics (also known as wound ballistics) is
important to hunters to ensure that the animals they shoot are killed in as
humane a fashion as possible. Ethical hunters strive to inflict a quick kill
subjecting the animal to as little pain and suffering as practical. The fire-
arm and cartridge are tailored to specific game animals toward this end.
In military and police use the study of terminal ballistics is often the
study of how the impact of bullets affects human beings. The goal of the
Policeman when he is compelled to fire on another person is to stop an
imminent threat as soon as possible (not necessarily to kill). The goal of
the soldier is similar to that of the policeman but the “rules of engage-
ment” of these two occupations are considerably different. A soldier might
be attacked from a long distance where the Policeman is often within a few
yards of a threat.
“The study of terminal ballistics has as its goal the development of
ethical solutions to the problems of firearms use against living targets.”
—Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
152 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

24.1 DEFINITION

Terminal ballistics is the scientific study of the patterns and relationships

or interactions between the bullet and the target.
In the terminal ballistics of the bullet, we study the effect of the target
over the bullet or the patterns and relationships of the transfer of energy
from the bullet to the target.
In the terminal ballistics of the target, we study the effect of the bullet
over the target or the patterns and relationships of the acceptance of pen-
etration or denial (reflection) of energy from the bullet.
A study of terminal ballistics starts at the precise moment the bullet
begins to transfer energy into the target; the target begins to accept or
reflect energy from the bullet or the bullet begins to penetrate the target.
Such a study would also include the failure of the bullet to transfer
energy into the target, a refusal of the target to accept energy from the bul-
let, or a failure of the bullet to penetrate the target.
CHAPTER 25

TRANSFER OF ENERGY

CONTENTS

25.1 Introduction ................................................................................ 153

25.2 Conclusion ................................................................................. 156

“In the physical sciences, an energy transfer or ‘energy exchange’ from

one system to another is said to occur when an amount of energy crosses
the boundary between them, thus increasing the energy content of one sys-
tem while decreasing the energy content of the other system by the same
amount. The transfer is characterized by the quantity of energy trans-
ferred, which can be specified in energy units such as the joule (J), in com-
bination with the direction of the transfer, which can be specified as in (to)
or out of (from) one system or the other. The transfer occurs in a process
which changes the state of each system.”
—Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

25.1 INTRODUCTION

In Figure 25.1, we have two components of physics to form the relation-

ship of transfer of energy (TE):
(1) Kinetic energy (KE)
(2) Target density (Tp)
154 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

Tp
TE

Kinetic Energy (KE)

KE TE
TE

Spin
TE
FIGURE 25.1

A careful study will easily reveal velocity, weight, mass, momentum,

etc., as not the correct components or variables that make up the relation-
ship of transfer of energy. It is only kinetic energy and target density.
• If we were to increase the bullet’s kinetic energy, we will increase the
transfer of energy into the target or anything else possessing density.
• If we were to increase the target’s density, we will increase the trans-
fer of energy from the bullet into the target.
Therefore, the relationship of transfer of energy is the product of kinetic
energy (KE) and target density (Tp) or:

TE = KE×Tp (1)

As we can now see, the actual amount of kinetic energy a bullet can
or will transfer into a target or anything with density depends directly on
the amount of kinetic energy available in the bullet and the density of the
target the bullet strikes. Without density, the bullet can only possess its
potential energy, also a product of its mass and the square of its velocity,
and working out the above relationship will readily prove the bullet cannot
transfer all of its kinetic energy into the target, either. Some of it converts
into heat, light, noise, and other electromagnetic phenomena, including
radio waves. This means, among other things, each target density and bul-
let combination will provide its own distinctive and identifiable signature
when the bullet strikes a target.
It also means, or at least suggests, that if we were to develop the sci-
ence and technology, we could render either a bullet or an explosive charge
Transfer of Energy 155

inside of the bullet (projectile) harmless once we will have removed the
kinetic energy from a passing bullet or the repercussive waves of an explo-
sion (containing the lethal kinetic energy) in front of the target.
From the other end of this perspective, if we could manipulate target
density, such as a reduction of volume for a given mass, we could just as
easily either render it useless as a defense barrier with the approaching bul-
let or projectile with its explosive charge, or increase the density, through
an increase in volume for a given mass, to render the target impenetrable.
A passing bullet or the repercussion waves of an explosion, either con-
ventional or nuclear, will possess only a minimal capability to inflict dam-
age if we were to remove its kinetic energy with some kind of force-field
(evolving from the science of small arms ballistics). A target, or defense
barrier, becomes transparent if – with the aid of a projecting force-field
– we were to manipulate either a reduction or displacement of density
through a manipulation of volume.
In Eq. (25.1), representing the physical relationship between transfer
of energy to kinetic energy and density, it is a generalization that will only
work in simple problems. If we were to attempt a calculation of transfer of
energy into a given target, however, with the bullet still moving through
it, it is not so simple. As we do with the calculation of the loss of kinetic
energy and velocity, through the transfer of energy into each cubic inch of
the bullet’s flight path, using the LTTE method, we have to calculate the
transfer of energy into the target at every cubic increment of penetration.
Each subsequent penetration will transfer a little less energy into the tar-
get, precisely corresponding to a reduction of bullet terminal velocity and
terminal kinetic energy.
A derivative of the LTTE method takes the following appearance:
n =∞
TE ξ = Lim ∫ ∑  p∆TE ξ − ( ∆KE ξ × ∆Tpξ )  (2)
ξ→ Τ

where TEξ = transfer of energy in the initial terminal velocity (ξ); ξ→Ŧ =
computations from the initial terminal velocity (ξ) to the point the bullet
stops entirely in the target (Ŧ) or leaves it.
Routine: Similar to LTTE, take the second increment (Δ) of transfer of
energy (TE) of the initial terminal velocity (ξ) and multiply it by the second
156 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

increment (Δ) of kinetic energy (KE) in the initial terminal (ξ) and, with
that answer, subtract it from the first or proceeding increment (pΔ) of the
initial terminal velocity. Continue to compute to each increment until the
bullet stops in the target (Ŧ); then add (Σ) up each answer in each incre-
ment. It is not really complicated and rarely takes more than 6 to 12 itera-
tions for living tissue.
A manipulation of the transfer of energy relationship will allow us to
calculate the kinetic energy at the initial terminal velocity (ξ) if we know
the transfer of energy (TE) and the target’s density (Tp):

TE
KE = (3)
Tp

Likewise, if we know the transfer of energy and the kinetic energy in

the first increment of penetration, we can then calculate the target’s density:
TE
Tp = (4)
KE

25.2 CONCLUSION

A study of the transfer of energy relationship in the science of terminal

ballistics can be the beginning or inception of new sciences. Without a
proper and solid grasp of this important subject, we could never readily
understand terminal ballistics as a most significant science, or its ramifi-
cations, implications, and offshoots toward the development of other sci-
ences and technologies.
Such knowledge can lead us to most significant developments, such as
force-fields and ballistic signatures.
CHAPTER 26

TEMPERATURE OF
TRANSFER OF ENERGY

CONTENTS

26.1 Introduction ................................................................................ 157

26.2 Manipulation of the Relationship............................................... 158
26.3 Conclusion ................................................................................. 159

26.1 INTRODUCTION

As stated earlier, in the chapter on Transfer of Energy, part of the kinetic

energy that transfers into the target, or anything with density, such as the
air in the flight path, converts into heat as well as other electromagnetic
phenomena.
• If we increase the bullet’s velocity into a material consisting of any
measure of density, we increase the temperature (T°) of the transfer
of energy into that material.
• If we increase the density of the material to any given bullet velocity,
we also increase the temperature of the transfer of energy into that
material.
Therefore, the mathematical relationship of the temperature (T°) of the
transfer of energy (TE) is the product of velocity (V) and density (p); or:

T ° = V×p (1)
158 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

Because this relationship of temperature of the transfer of energy is a

generalization of the relationship between velocity and density, the above
equation would only apply to the first increment of material density the
bullet strikes. To calculate the temperature of the transfer of energy in the
entire bullet’s terminal flight path (T°TEξ), we would need a special set of
instructions where:
n =∞
T TE = Lim ∑ ( ∆V × ∆Tp ) (2)
ξ→Τ

Each successive increment of density in the bullet’s terminal flight path

would possess a small but calculable lower temperature of the transfer of
energy, due to the bullet slowing down, than in its preceding increment of
density.
In many circumstances, it may be more appropriate, perhaps more use-
ful statistically, to identify and measure, or calculate, the exact temperature
of the transfer of energy at each increment of the terminal flight path and
then to calculate either the mean average or the median (see Statistics).
Mean average is the sum of the values of each increment in the bullet’s
terminal flight path divided by its number of increments.
Median is the value in a distribution of values, of increments in the termi-
nal flight path, representing a mid-range (50%) of the distribution of values.
Both mean average and median have their advantages and, of course,
disadvantages. Whether we use mean average or median depends on the
actual circumstances, the nature of the material density and densities,
depth of density or densities, and the distribution pattern of values in the
terminal flight path.

26.2 MANIPULATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP

If we know the temperature of the transfer of energy and the bullet’s termi-
nal velocity, we can calculate the density at each increment of penetration:

T
Tp = (3)
V
Temperature of Transfer of Energy 159

On the other hand, if we know the temperature of the transfer of energy

at any given increment and the material density at that increment, we can
calculate the bullet’s velocity:

T
V= (4)
Tp

26.3 CONCLUSION

We can use this important relationship as a tool to work out more complex
problems in terminal ballistics and as part of a “building block” to our
knowledge on the entire subject.
By itself, knowledge of the temperature of the transfer of energy may
have little use to us presently; however, some time in the future, it may
become critically important in certain military applications. In one appli-
cation in mind, if we know the density of a given target and the tempera-
ture of the transfer of energy in the first increment of penetration, we could
then calculate the initial terminal velocity and, with that knowledge, we
could proceed to calculate the bullet’s trajectory backwards to determine
the point of origin, one of the many techniques to locate and identify a
sniper’s position.
CHAPTER 27

REFLECTION OF KINETIC ENERGY

CONTENTS

27.1 Introduction ................................................................................ 161

27.2 Conclusion ................................................................................. 162

27.1 INTRODUCTION

“Reflection is the change in direction of a wavefront at an interface

between two different media so that the wavefront returns into the medium
from which it originated. Common examples include the reflection of light,
sound and water waves. The law of reflection says that for specular reflec-
tion the angle at which the wave is incident on the surface equals the angle
at which it is reflected. Mirrors exhibit specular reflection.”
—Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reflection of kinetic energy (RE) represents the relationship between

the kinetic energy (KE) at the initial terminal velocity (ξ) to the kinetic
energy not remaining in the bullet or travelling in the target. It is the energy
that reflects from the target and no longer accompanies the bullet and con-
sist of the electromagnetic phenomena we associate with heat, light, noise,
radio waves, etc., where:
RE = KEξ – KE (1)
where RE = Reflected energy (ft/lbs); KEξ = Kinetic energy at the initial
terminal velocity (ft/lbs); KE = Kinetic energy not remaining in bullet or
in target (ft/lb)
162 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

A simple manipulation of the above algebraic equation will help us to

calculate the kinetic energy at the initial terminal velocity if we know the
reflection of energy and the kinetic energy not remaining in the bullet or
in the target:
KEξ = RE + KE (2)
With the above knowledge, we can proceed to calculate the initial ter-
minal velocity:
ξ = 2KE / M (3)

Then, with knowledge of the weapon and type of ammunition, we can

proceed to calculate the bullet’s trajectory backwards in order to identify
and locate the shooter’s origin.

27.2 CONCLUSION

Reflection of energy is another “building block” in our knowledge of ter-

minal ballistics. Though it does not necessarily seem terribly important
by itself, it can lead us to analyze and work out solutions to problems in
terminal ballistics and certainly to provide each of us with a stronger line
of continuity of insight and comprehension of this whole subject of the
science of small arms ballistics.
Reflection of energy is the measurable reflective signature each bullet
creates as it strikes anything with density.
Anything with density will leave a distinctive and easily identifiable
signature we can use to identify the target’s composition, density, and
temperature or the bullet’s composition, density, temperature, velocity,
or kinetic energy, including the electromagnetic phenomena we associate
with heat, light, noise, radio waves, etc.
CHAPTER 28

ACCEPTANCE OF KINETIC ENERGY

CONTENTS

28.1 Introduction ................................................................................ 163

28.2 Conclusion ................................................................................. 163

28.1 INTRODUCTION

In the study of the acceptance of kinetic energy, our primary concern ought
to be the target’s ability to accept energy from the bullet. Though any
bullet can easily transfer energy into anything or any target with density,
the target itself cannot accept the bullet’s energy unless the bullet at least
partially penetrates it. Then, with penetration, the amount of energy the
target accepts (AE) is the summation of the transfer of energy into each
increment of penetration in its terminal flight path:
n =∞
AE = ∑ ∆TE (1)
¾→ T

Because each subsequent increment of penetration would possess a

different and lower value of kinetic energy the bullet can transfer into the
target, as it penetrates the target, we have the same relationship as we do
with the transfer of energy.

28.2 CONCLUSION

Acceptance of energy deals with the study of the target’s ability to accept
energy from the bullet as it penetrates the target, although it may or may
not cause damage to the target.
164 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

Without penetration, there can be no acceptance of energy from the

bullet to the target or damage to the target for that matter.
CHAPTER 29

THEORY OF PENETRATION

CONTENTS

29.1 Introduction ................................................................................ 165

29.2 Theory ........................................................................................ 166
29.3 Application ................................................................................. 167
29.4 Use of Bullet Lubricants ............................................................ 168
29.5 Manipulation of Density to Increase Velocity and
Penetration ....................................................................................169
29.6 Varminting.................................................................................. 169
29.7 Bullets for Big-Game Hunting ................................................... 172
29.8 Dangerous Games ...................................................................... 173
29.9 A Clarification of These Relationships ...................................... 174
29.10 Conclusion ............................................................................... 175

29.1 INTRODUCTION

If we were to fire the Colt M-16, the Soviet-made AK-47, and Smith &
Wesson’s M-29 at a metallic target of any particular density but of suffi-
cient density to eventually stop the bullet, a pattern will eventually emerge
to demonstrate a relationship between velocity and bullet diameter to bul-
let density and target density – to penetration.
The M-16 fires a 55 grain bullet of 0.224 inches in diameter at approxi-
mately 3,250 fps; the AK-47 a 122 grain bullet of 0.308 inches in diameter
at nearly 2,250 fps, and the M-29 a bullet of 240 grains of 0.429 inches in
diameter at a maximum muzzle velocity of 1,600 fps (with the right load
and gun). Yet, each gun produces an average level of kinetic energy of
166 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

between 1,300 and 1,400 ft/lbs at the muzzle (under optimum conditions).
Though of different diameters, each bullet is made up of the same materi-
als and densities.

29.2 THEORY

From this knowledge in the above Introduction, we have enough informa-

tion to perceive a pattern and relationship between velocity, diameter, and
density, where penetration (P) represents:

Bp (V / d )
P= (1)
Tp

where Bp = bullet density (lbs/cubic inch); V = velocity (fps); d = diameter

of bullet (inches); Tp = target density (lbs/cubic inch).
• When we increase bullet density, we increase its penetration.
• When we increase bullet velocity, we increase penetration.
• When we increase bullet diameter, however, we decrease penetration.
• When we increase target density, however, we decrease bullet
penetration.
From these patterns and relationships, we can easily derive additional
conclusions through a manipulation of the above algebraic equation.
If we take the bullet density (Bp) and place it to the left of the equal (=)
and penetration (P) to the right, we can determine the best bullet density
for a given target density, bullet velocity, and diameter:

Tp
Bp = (2)
(V / d ) P 

Now it becomes obvious, if we can manipulate the equation for pen-

etration to determine the best bullet density for a given set of circum-
stances, we can just easily manipulate the same equation to determine
the best bullet velocity for a given diameter, bullet density, and target
density:
Theory of Penetration 167

Tp
Bv = (3)
( Bp / d ) / P 

Then, if we know the bullet density, velocity, diameter, and depth of

penetration into a given target, we can easily calculate the target’s density:
 Bp (V / d ) 
Tp =  (4)
P

At the same time, if we must design-engineer a gun-system for a

particular target density with certain known bullet density and velocity
parameters, we can now easily calculate the best bullet diameter (Bd) to
successfully penetrate the target, either partially or completely:

 Bp (V / Tp ) 
Bd =  (5)
P

29.3 APPLICATION

These relationships dealing with a study of penetration apply to hunting

as well. However, instead of changing the metal or lead alloy to control
and vary density for a given hunting application, the firearms accessory
industry manipulates the bullet’s density through a manipulation of its
jacket thickness and composition. If greater density becomes necessary
to penetrate something as dense as the armor-plating material on a tank,
then the bullet engineers often will simply switch to a denser core material
such as depleted uranium, and – if realistically possible – either increase
the muzzle velocity or drop the bullet’s diameter. Usually, the engineers
lack the option to change diameter; they must ordinarily work with a par-
ticular gun-system which may already operate at its maximum potential in
its present caliber. So, an increase in the bullet’s composition becomes the
only option available to them other than to work out a new gunpowder(s)
formula to produce a greater muzzle velocity with the same chamber pres-
sure, if possible.
168 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

In the sporting firearms accessory industry, when targets tend to be

much less dense than a tank’s armor, the bullet engineers have even more
technical restrictions as they seek out a solution to each problem. Except
for special, non-hunting applications such as indoor target practice, a lead
core is absolutely mandatory. It is not only the recent laws from the United
States Congress, local or state governments, or the people who make a
career out of the gun control controversy when not competent to discuss
the subject, or the people who latch onto an ideology as a substitute for
intelligence, that complicates the restrictions toward a better solution,
but simply a problem in the availability and suitability of the selection of
materials and their physical properties. We only have so many materials
suitable for a bullet and, frankly, lead or a lead alloy (consisting of tin and
alimony principally) makes the best bullets ordinarily.

29.4 USE OF BULLET LUBRICANTS

However, as we increase the muzzle velocity, from a few hundred feet per
second to several thousand feet per second, we must lubricate the bullets
to prevent them from leading the bore, whether by using bear grease, an
elaborate formula of beewax and alox 2137F, a glassine or grease-proof
paper or an alloy of copper-zinc around a lead core. When we increase
muzzle velocity, we must improve the lubricant in order to avoid leading
the bore each time. As lead builds up in the bore, with each subsequent
shot, it incrementally increases the resistance to the bullet’s movement in
the bore, with a corresponding increase in bore pressure, a reduction in
bore velocity and, of course, it changes the time-pressure curve in each
subsequent shot to knock it out of time.
With each subsequent shot, and with each successive build-up of lead
in the bore, the gunpowder behind the bullet, as it burns traveling through
the bore, will stop burning further and further away from the muzzle. At
the same time, we will notice the groups getting progressively bigger
downrange until, eventually, maintaining a group or hitting anything con-
sistently becomes a real challenge.
Bear grease is predominately a low-velocity lubricant, used in black
powder muzzle-loaders, and copper-zinc jackets serve as a high-speed
Theory of Penetration 169

lubricant for high-power center-fire rifles and handguns. When not using
enough lubricant, if we were to look carefully, we will see a change in
the color of the smoke coming out of the bore, probably a combination of
blue/gray/black out to 5, 10, or 15 feet or more.
Likewise, when using too much lubricant, we will see a similar change
in the color of the smoke plus a much stronger and a most distinctive,
unforgettable odor of lubricant. All this is particularly profound when
shooting in the snow. Whether too much or too little lubricant, it leaves a
most distinctive trail in front of the bore.

29.5 MANIPULATION OF DENSITY TO INCREASE VELOCITY

AND PENETRATION

In time, though first and foremost a trial-and-error system, a variety of

people, inside and outside of the firearms industry, among professionals
and amateurs, discovered that if they were to place the lead core inside of
a copper-zinc jacket and then to vary the thickness of the jacket for a given
target, they could vary its penetration and hence effectiveness into that
given target, whether for squirrels or a dangerous rhinoceros.
More likely than not, they did not realize they were simply manipulat-
ing the bullet’s density through a manipulation of the jacket’s thickness.
This manipulation of density would control its penetration. Density, as
we discovered in the relationship described in the algebraic formula of
penetration, is one of the three variables responsible for bullet penetration.

29.6 VARMINTING

In varminting – shooting at small game – it became necessary to develop

guns and bullets that could shoot very tight groups at extremely long dis-
tances while maintaining velocities above the speed of sound. Though
some small animals may be more intelligent than others, varminters soon
discovered all of them were intelligent enough to perceive danger at dis-
tances of several hundred yards and to run and hide in their underground
homes upon sight of a man with a gun, which made hunting them an
170 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

exceedingly difficult and complex technological challenge, particularly in

the open grasslands of Oklahoma and similar terrain throughout the world.
At first, these hunters, in full recognition of the technical challenge,
demanded better guns and, later, better triggers assemblies, optical sights,
sighting scopes, bullets, and range-finders.
It is beyond the scope of this text to describe the developmental prob-
lems of guns, barrels, triggers, optical range-finders, and sighting systems.
So, to restrict ourselves to ballistics, we will stay with the study of the
bullet.
Because these small critters were really very, very small, they were
hard to see at great distances on the grasslands and even more so to hit
with conventional arms. When the hunter finally did strike one of them,
he discovered they did not die easily, either. To make it worse, they would
typically survive long enough to run, crawl, creep, or edge back into their
underground holes, either making it impossible to confirm a hit or to fetch
the game to eat later.
Those bullets in use at the time provided far too much penetration
to frequently cause massive damage to the animals without killing them
immediately, giving them time to run and hide.
Eventually, some of these hunters recognized the problem as a prob-
lem with the design of the bullet. Their jackets were simply too thick to
cause the bullets to completely penetrate the animals, sometimes with only
superficial damage. When these bullets did penetrate completely through
the animals, much of the lethal kinetic energy we need and use to kill
it went with the bullet to strike something behind the animal, usually
Motherearth. Cast bullets, though certainly cheap enough, also have the
tendency to penetrate completely to cause very minimal and sometimes
superficial tissue damage.
Using a trial-and-error system, bullet manufacturers, to meet the
demands for better varminting bullets, began to produce bullets with very
thin jackets. They discovered, at very high velocities – from 2500 to 4000
fps – the bullets would expand violently within an inch or two of pen-
etration. This explosive collision would effectively prevent or slow down
complete penetration and therefore transfer most of the remaining kinetic
energy from the initial terminal velocity into the animal.
Though bullet engineers and manufacturers may have never used
a mathematical system to determine the correct jacket thickness, it is
Theory of Penetration 171

nevertheless entirely possible to arrive at a very realistic conclusion with

the following equation:

SD 2
Vthj = (6)
M ×ξ

where Vthj = Jacket thickness for a varminting bullet (inches); SD =

sectional density (look for it in reloading manuals); M = Bullet’s mass
(weight/225,218 = mass); and ξ = expectant terminal velocity at the target
(fps).

“Sectional density is the ratio of an object’s mass to its cross-sectional

area. It conveys how well an object’s mass is distributed (by its shape)
to overcome resistance. For illustration, a nail can penetrate a target
medium with less force than a coin of the same mass. During World War
II bunker-busting Röchling shells were developed by German engineer
August Cönders, based on the theory of increasing sectional density to
improve penetration. Röchling shells were tested in 1942 and 1943 against
the Belgian Fort d’Aubin-Neufchâteau and saw very limited use during
World War II. Sectional density is often used in gun ballistics where sec-
tional density is the ratio of a projectile weight to its diameter”
—Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

W
SD = (7)
7000 × d 2

where SD = sectional density1; W = weight of bullet (grains); d = diameter

of bullet (inches).

1
Note: Beware! There is considerable fraud and controversy in the proper
use and definition of sectional density. With the association of sectional
density to greater range and accuracy, some bullet manufacturers exag-
gerate their sectional density figures to encourage the ammunition reload-
ers to use their bullets instead of their competitor’s, although they claim in
their literature they use the above formula to calculate sectional density.
Not always true!
172 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

29.7 BULLETS FOR BIG-GAME HUNTING

As the hunter went after bigger and bigger game, it became increasingly
obvious for him, in order to increase penetration in the game, he would
need to increase the jacket thickness. For a reduction in diameter was out
of the question, in most instances. Either he had to stick to the same caliber
(diameter) or was committed to it due to economic considerations. Chang-
ing the caliber can be very expensive.
From experience, if the bullet expands too quickly, due to the thin-
ness of the jacket, it would waste the dispersion of kinetic energy on the
surface of the animal to create very large but superficial wounds. Not
enough of the kinetic energy would enter the interior of the animal to be
sufficiently lethal. Due to the size of these big-game animals, an arbitrary
figure of 200 ft/lbs per cubic inch of penetration for a minimum of 6 to 12
inches in the animal’s torso has been chosen as a realistic figure in most
instances, depending on skin depth and thickness and its physiological
makeup at the time of the encounter. No different than man, animals are
hard to kill!
If, on the other hand, the jacket was too thick, the bullet would pen-
etrate completely to carry most of the remaining kinetic energy with it.
Pursuant to the transfer of energy relationship, a significant but not nec-
essarily an adequate amount of lethal kinetic energy would transfer into
each increment of penetration; instead, most of this lethality would leave
the animal on the other side of its torso, rendering the animal still alive
either running away to live for another day or to die somewhere out in
the field from the combination of trauma and the lost of blood. In some
instances, the poor animal may run a few hundred yards just for another
hunter to take credit for shooting him as well as the privilege to take home
his meat.
Finally, both the hunter and manufacture have recognized a need to
use a jacket with just the right thickness to allow the bullet to penetrate
more deeply than a varminting bullet but not completely. They wanted
the bullet to penetrate about half-way into the torso of the animal’s body
and then stop in order to transfer all the remaining kinetic energy for the
maximum effect. The algebraic equation below will give the approximate
jacket thickness of these hunting bullets:
Theory of Penetration 173

SD 2 (8)
HBthj =
2

where HBthj = Heavy Bullet jacket thickness (inches); SD = sectional

density.

29.8 DANGEROUS GAMES

Later, while shooting big and really dangerous game, it became obvious
these hunters needed a bullet with a greater jacket thickness and a much
heavier weight to survive the physical shock of entering massive tissue
depth without deforming beyond recognition and while penetrating much
more deeply to transfer all or most of its remaining lethal kinetic energy.
Below is an algebraic equation to provide for an approximate answer to
this problem, of course depending on the distance the bullet must travel
before it reaches the game and its initial terminal velocity, which should
be above the speed of sound to be effective.

d ( SD )
DGthj = (9)
2

where DGthj = Dangerous Game jacket thickness (inches); SD = sectional

density; d = Bullet diameter (inches).
Now, we must realize it was not the original purpose of bullet engineers
and manufactures to use the copper-zinc alloy jackets around the lead core
for greater penetration, though it certainly did just that. They were using
these jackets, perhaps in some instances without any apparent awareness
of some side-effects, as a high-speed lubricant. At the velocities they were
trying to obtain, they needed better lubricants to prevent lead from accu-
mulating in the bore and, with these higher velocities; they would obtain
a much flatter trajectory. With a flatter trajectory comes a lesser parabolic
trajectory and hence a target easier to hit at varying distances with less
compensation and sighting error.
It did not take long to recognize these higher velocities caused much
greater penetration at longer distances as well as a flatter trajectory.
Without understanding the relationship of penetration to bullet diameter,
174 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

velocity, and density, they did not immediately grasp the significance of
their altering bullet density through the use of a jacket around the lead
core. When we re-examine the algebraic equation for penetration, the rela-
tionship between bullet velocity, diameter, and density becomes clearer.

29.9 A CLARIFICATION OF THESE RELATIONSHIPS

As some hunters began to hunt big and dangerous game with these high-
velocity jacketed bullets, instead of the traditional paper patch bullets in
those days, operating with substantially lower muzzle velocities, they
discovered some undesirable side-effects: – Some bullets with their thin
jackets would break up too quickly leaving the lead core separated from
the deformed and fragmented jackets and others, with their thicker jack-
ets – would simply completely penetrate the entire animal with little ill
effect and minimal damage. If the bullet were to break up prematurely,
the kinetic energy would scatter all over on the surface or in the shallow
depth; if not, then the bullet may leave the animal entirely carrying most of
the lethal kinetic energy with it. Hence, it was imperative for the bullet to
stop and stay inside of the animal for the maximum transfer of energy into
the torso to be truly effective, particularly for large and dangerous games.
Else, we might find them going after us treating us as their game.
Then, some people, without a proper grasp of this subject, began to per-
ceive, or thought they did, that if they were to design the bullet to expand
as it travels through the body of the animal, it would transfer more or most
of its lethal kinetic energy to cause the maximum kinetic upset. But this is
not so! Transfer of energy from the bullet to the target is a function of the
relationship between the bullet’s kinetic energy and the target’s density.
Bullet diameter is not a variable in this relationship.
An expansion of the bullet as it travels through the animal or anything
with density cannot increase the transfer of energy.
However, with diameter as a variable in the relationship of penetration,
the expansion increases diameter and therefore decreases penetration as
it slows down due to an increase in the bullet’s nose and cylinder drag
compressions with a parallel reduction in velocity, transfer of energy and
nose and cylinder drag compression. If a successful design, the bullet will
stop inside of the animal to transfer all its remaining kinetic energy for
Theory of Penetration 175

the maximum kinetic disruption and the transfer of energy inherent in that
bullet design as long as the bullet stays intact. If it breaks up in terminal
flight, it loses its effectiveness. It is not enough to simply design the bullet
to expand upon impact with the target or within a certain distance after its
first increment of penetration.
If the bullet, with its larger diameter due to expansion in terminal
flight, fails to stay inside of the animal, it will not transfer any more kinetic
energy than a non-expansion bullet penetrating completely; this is because
it cannot transfer any more energy than it has available owing to the tar-
get’s density. Remember! Transfer of energy is a function of the bullet’s
kinetic energy in flight (in motion) to the product of the target’s density.
In fact, an expansion bullet may actually prove less effective as it slows
down and finally completely penetrates. When we add up the total loss of
kinetic energy through a transfer of energy, we may very well discover
a non-expansion bullet may transfer more energy due to a higher aver-
age terminal velocity. Unless we can use the rapid increase in the bullet’s
diameter to eventually stop the bullet inside of the animal to prevent its
complete penetration, contrary to popular belief, an expansion bullet will
have no great advantage over a non-expansion bullet with the same level
of kinetic energy at the same initial terminal velocity.

29.10 CONCLUSION

A study of penetration and its mathematical relationships reveal the ready

possibility of manipulating penetration through a manipulation of:
• The bullet’s density (through a manipulation of jacket thickness and
composition).
• The bullet’s diameter.
• The bullet’s velocity.
• Once we know and understand the relationships of penetration, we
can easily manipulate these relationships in order to calculate:
• Bullet density.
• Bullet diameter.
• Bullet velocity.
• Target density.
176 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

Though the firearms industry, as a whole, does not use a mathematical

system to determine jacket thickness, a trial-and-error system has been in
use for years and works well sometimes.
An expansion bullet, unless it stops inside of the animal’s body, cannot
transfer more energy than a non-expansion bullet. Hence, it is necessary to
manipulate the combination of every variable of penetration, including the
jacket’s thickness and the bullet’s composition, in order to keep the bullet
inside of the animal to be effective.
Though not mentioned above, there is also a safety and civil rights
issue. When we hunt, shoot in self-defense or shoot in combat, we would
prefer the bullets not to travel any further than the intended target.
CHAPTER 30

CALCULATING THE EXPECTANT

DEPTH OF PENETRATION INTO
ANIMAL ISSUE

CONTENTS

30.1 Introduction ................................................................................ 177

30.2 Solution ...................................................................................... 177

30.1 INTRODUCTION

We have discovered, in our study of the Transfer of Energy, the Theory

of Penetration and the subsequent theories and methods to calculate
trajectory, and we have also developed an inherent method of calculat-
ing the expectant depth of penetration into a target, whether animate or
inanimate.
But it is a little complex and requires careful thought and methodology
in its application.

30.2 SOLUTION

To resolve this problem, we need to know the muzzle velocity and the
bullet’s weight to determine its kinetic energy at the muzzle, the distance
between the gun and the target, the initial terminal velocity, and the den-
sity of tissue to determine its depth of penetration.
178 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

If the bullet has the proper physical attributes to completely penetrate

the target, we can also proceed to calculate the maximum expectant range
of lethality beyond the target.
It will not take much thought for us to realize we shall need a very
high-speed computer to handle this kind of number-crunching problem, as
we do in the complex calculations of a bullet’s trajectory.
There is an additional problem with the actual figure representing tis-
sue density. What is the average density of living tissue – say, per cubic
inch?. It seems to be somewhere between 0.02 and 0.04 pounds per cubic
inch and, due to its compressibility characteristics, tissue density increases
with bullet penetration.1 The two components of drag, due to the surface
of the nose and drag due to the surface of the cylinder, will naturally com-
press the tissue density immediately in front of the nose, slowing down the
bullet even faster.
First, we must deal with two issues here. Whether the tissue density
is 0.02 lbs/cu./inch or 0.04 lbs/cu./inch, or somewhat elsewhere, does not
matter. Because the number of iterations in our computation is so small,
typically between 1 and 18 for 1 and 18 inches of penetration, respectively,
the accumulative error is completely negligible.
Secondly, the issue of compressibility is a function of pressure in
front of the bullet, as defined in the science of thermodynamics and fluid
mechanics. However, because the bullet, as it continues its penetration
into living tissue, rapidly decelerates, the rate of tissue compressibility
and density also rapidly decelerates to correspond with the bullet’s rapid
deceleration.
It would match the mathematical mechanics of the LTTE method in
which each successive computation would be successively smaller than
the preceding computation except, under very special circumstances,
would not add up to anything of significance. The only thing of interest,
which may or may not have any value, would be the number-crunching
computations of calculating the accumulative compressibility values of
every cubic inch of air in the bullet’s flight path, or 3,600 iterations of
computation for every interval of 100 yards.

1
“In thermodynamics and fluid mechanics, compressibility is a measure of the relative volume change
of a fluid or solid as a response to a pressure (or mean stress) change.”
—Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Calculating the Expectant Depth of Penetration into Animal Issue 179

Below is Algorithm 4, the first of two algorithms in this chapter, to

calculate the expectant depth of penetration into living tissue using the
LTTE method, namely the repetitive calculation of the loss of velocity
and kinetic energy, through the transfer of energy from the bullet to each
increment of penetration in the terminal flight path and, then, to either
determine the depth of penetration or, if it penetrates completely, the
expectant maximum range of lethality beyond the target. As with the other
algorithms in this text, it was written originally in 1990 using Basic as the
language on the Tandy 2000.2

ALGORITHM 42

30 CLS : CLEAR : PRINT “Expectant Depth of Penetration into Liv-

ing Animal Tissue”
40 PRINT : INPUT “Kinetic Energy at the muzzle = _____,” T
50 PRINT : INPUT “Succeeding Increment of Kinetic Energy =
_____,” E
60 PRINT : INPUT “Tissue Density (lbs/cu./in.) = _____,” P
70 PRINT : INPUT “Maximum Depth of Penetration (inches) =
_____,” Inches
80 PRINT : INPUT “Bullet Weight (grains) = _____,” W
90 FOR I = 1 TO INCHES
100 O = E * P
110 K=T-O : T=K
120 O=E*P : Y=SQR((2*K)/(W/225218))
130 K=T-O
140 CLS ‘Clear the screen
150 LOCATE 8,18 : PRINT I,Y,K
160 NEXT I

2
Note: To obtain “succeeding increment of kinetic energy,” multiply the kinetic energy at the muzzle
by .0000509 (dry air density) [TE = KE x ơ] to get the TE and then subtract that answer from the KE
at the muzzle. From there you will get the remaining KE in the succeeding increment of penetration
of the bullet’s flight path.
180 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

170 IF Y< = 1 THEN LOCATE 12,20 : PRINT “DO NOT EXPECT

FULL PENETRATION”
180 IF Y >1 THEN LOCATE 12, 20 : PRINT “EXPECT FULL ANI-
MAL PENETRATION”
190 GOTO 240
200 LOCAE 14,20 : PRINT “DEPTH OF PENETRATION = _____
INCHES”
210 LOCATE 14,42 : PRINT I
220 PRINT CHR$(7) ‘BEEP
230 END
240 COUNT = COUNT + 1
250 O = E * 0.0000509
260 K = T – O : T = K
270 O = E * 0.0000509 : Y = SQR((2*K)/(W/225218))
280 K = T – O
290 I = I + 1
300 LOCATE 20,18 : PRINT COUNT, Y, K
310 IF K => 60 THEN COUNT = COUNT + 1 : GOTO 240 ELSE 320
320 IF K < 60 THEN GOTO 330
330 I = COUNT/3600*100
340 LOCATE 16,8 : PRINT “DISTANCE OF MOVEMENT BEYOND
TARGET = “
350 LOCATE 16,60 : PRINT “YARDS”
370 PRINT CHR$(7) ‘BEEP
380 LOCATE 24, 1, 1
390 END
The above algorithm calculates the depth of penetration into living
tissue, using the LTTE method, starting at the initial terminal velocity.
If these calculations determine the bullet will completely penetrate the
target, then it continues on to calculate the expectant distance of lethality
beyond the target, stopping when the calculations drop below 60 ft/lb of
kinetic energy, the threshold of lethality for most humans under normal
average conditions. It only calculates the transfer of energy drag, not the
other two components of drag.
Algorithm 5 includes the calculations of all three components of drag:
transfer of energy, nose drag compression, and cylinder drag compression.
Calculating the Expectant Depth of Penetration into Animal Issue 181

It provides a greater accuracy for the calculations beyond the target; how-
ever, due to the small number of iterations, the difference between the two
algorithms in the calculation of penetration is negligible. Neither algo-
rithm attempts to handle the calculations or predictions of compressibility
as the bullet moves through the living tissue.

ALGORITHM 54

30 CLS : CLEAR : PRINT “PREDICTION OF LIVING TISSUE

PENETRATION”
40 PRINT : INPUT “Kinetic Energy at the muzzle = _____,” T
50 PRINT : INPUT “Succeeding Increment of Kinetic Energy =
_____,” E
60 PRINT : INPUT “Bullet’s Weight (grains) = _____,” W
70 PRINT : INPUT “Distance in Inches = “ , INCHES
80 PRINT : INPUT “Maximum Depth of Penetration into Game
(inches) = _____,” Depth
90 PRINT : INPUT “Living Tissue Density (lbs/cu./in.) = _____,”
DENSE
100 DEFDBL P, S
110 CLS : LOCATE 12, 25 : PRINT “PLEASE STAND BY …. COM-
PUTING!”
120 FOR I = 1 TO INCHES
130 O=E*P
140 K=T-O : T=K
150 O=E*P : Y = SQR((2*K)/(W/225218)) : IF W < 100 THEN GOTO
190
160 A = 1964636.542^ (1/2)
170 S = (A/(Y^ (1/2)/.0000509^ (1/2)))^2
180 P = SQR((S^2)*((SQR((2*K)/(W/225218)))^2))/1964636.542 :
GOTO 220

4
Note: When dealing with large, potentially dangerous game, in Algorithm 4, change line 310 to read,
“IF K=> 200 THEN COUNT = COUNT + 1 : GOTO 240 ELSE 320” and line 320 to read, “IF K<
200 THEN GOTO 330.” In Algorithm 5, change line 490 to read, “IF K=> 200 THEN COUNT =
COUNT + 1 : GOTO 420 ELSE 500” and line 500 to read, “IF K < 200 THEN GOTO 510.”
182 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

190 A = (1964636.542)^ (1/2)

200 S = (A/(Y^ (1/2)/.0000509^ (1/2)))*3
210 P = ((S^2*Y^2)^ (1/3))/1964636.542
220 K=T-O
230 LOCATE 14,37 : PRINT I
240 NEXT I
250 PRINT CHR$(7) ‘BEEP
260 FOR J = 1 TO DEPTH
270 O = E * DENSE
280 K = T – O : T = K
290 O = E * DENSE : Y = SQR((2*K)/(W/225218))
300 K = T – O
310 CLS ‘CLEAR THE SCREEN’
320 LOCATE 8,18 : PRINT J, Y, K
330 IF K = < 1 THEN GOTO 350
340 NEXT J
350 LOCATE 12,16 : PRINT “*** DO NOT EXPECT FULL PEN-
ETRATION ***”
360 IF K > 1 THEN LOCATE 12,16 : PRINT “*** EXPECT FULL
PENETRATION ***”
370 LOCATE 14,10 : PRINT “DEPTH OF PENETRATION = INCHES
OUT OF INCHES”
380 J = J – 1
390 LOCATE 14,32 : PRINT J
400 LOCATE 14,51 : PRINT DEPTH
410 PRINT CHR$(7) : IF K = 1 THEN GOTO 550
420 COUNT = COUNT + 1
430 O = E * .0000509
440 K = T – O : T = K
450 O = E * .0000509 : Y = SQR((2*K)/(W/225218))
460 K = T – O
470 I = I + 1
480 LOCATE 20,18 : PRINT COUNT, Y, K
490 IF K => 60 THEN COUNT = COUNT + 1 : GOTO 420 ELSE 500
500 IF K < 60 THEN GOTO 510
510 I = COUNT/3600*100
Calculating the Expectant Depth of Penetration into Animal Issue 183

520 LOCAE 16,4 : PRINT “DISTANCE OF LETHALITY AFTER

FULL PENETRATION = _____”
530 LOCATE 16,68 : PRINT “YARDS”
540 LOCATE 16,57 : PRINT I
550 PRINT CHR$(7) ‘BEEP FOR COMPLETION OF PROGRAM
560 LOCATE 24, 1, 1
570 END
CHAPTER 31

BALLISTIC REFLECTION COEFFICIENT*

“In physics and electrical engineering the reflection coefficient is a param-

eter that describes how much of an electromagnetic wave is reflected by
an impedance discontinuity in the transmission medium. It is equal to the
ratio of the amplitude of the reflected wave to the incident wave, with each
expressed as phasors.”
—Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ballistic reflection coefficient (BRC) deals with the proportion or ratio of

the difference between kinetic energy at the initial terminal velocity (KEξ)
and the reflection of kinetic energy (RE) from the surface of the target to
the sum of the kinetic energy at the initial terminal velocity and the reflec-
tion of kinetic energy from the surface of the target, where:

KEξ − RE
BRC = (1)
KEξ + RE

*
Suggestion: See a thesis on a report #1775, written by Nathan Gerber in August of 1966, with the
Ballistic Research Laboratories dealing with a study of Ballistic Reflection Coefficient. Frankly, it is
difficult to follow. You will find it via an Internet search engine. Please type “Ballistic Reflection Coef-
ficient” in the search window.
CHAPTER 32

BALLISTIC REFLECTION POWER

Ballistic reflection power (BRP) deals with the measurement of the target’s
power or ability to reflect kinetic energy and thereby reject penetration
from a given bullet at a given initial terminal velocity (ξ), and therefore
represents the product of reflection of energy (RE) and the differential of
the ballistic spectrum (dβs), where

BRP = RE×dβs (1)

Differential or the degree of difference of the ballistic spectrum is the

area of coverage between the .17 caliber and the big 16 inch guns on the
USS New Jersey in which a target will successfully defend. It is the mea-
surement of the power to reflect power, such as a bullet, without it causing
harm.1
When we increase the RE, we increase our ballistic reflecting power.
When we increase our differential ballistic spectrum or ability to deflect an
attempt at penetration, we increase our BRP.

1
“The user[s] reflect any power that is launched against them without being harmed. This serves as
a means of self-defense and counter-attack. The user can reflect whatever power is projected by their
target and turn it back on them.”
—Superpower Wiki
CHAPTER 33

BALLISTIC PENETRATING POWER

“For use against armored targets, or large, tough game animals, penetra-
tion is the most important consideration. Focusing the largest amount of
momentum on the smallest possible area of the target provides the greatest
penetration. Bullets for maximum penetration are designed to resist defor-
mation on impact, and usually are made of lead that is covered in a copper,
brass, or mild steel jacket (some are even solid copper or bronze alloy).
The jacket completely covers the front of the bullet, although often the rear
is left with exposed lead (this is a manufacturing consideration: the jacket
is formed first, and the lead is swaged in from the rear).
“For penetrating substances significantly harder than jacketed lead, the
lead core is supplemented with or replaced with a harder material, such as
hardened steel. Military armor-piercing small arms ammunition is made
from a copper-jacketed steel core; the steel resists deformation better than
the usual soft lead core leading to greater penetration. The current NATO
5.56mm SS109 (M855) bullet uses a steel-tipped lead core to improve pen-
etration, the steel tip providing resistance to deformation for armor piercing,
and the heavier lead core (25% heavier than the previous bullet, the M193)
providing increased sectional density for better penetration in soft targets.
For larger, higher-velocity calibers, such as tank guns, hardness is of sec-
ondary importance to density, and are normally sub-caliber projectiles made
from tungsten carbide, tungsten hard alloy or depleted uranium fired in a
light aluminum or magnesium alloy (or carbon fibre in some cases) sabot.
“Many modern tank guns are smoothbore, not rifled, because practical
rifling twists can only stabilize projectiles, such as an armor-piercing fin-
stabilized discarding sabot (APFSDS), with a length-to-diameter ratio of
up to about 5:1, the spin imposed by rifling interferes with shaped-charge
rounds, and also because the rifling adds friction and reduces the velocity
it is possible to achieve. To get the maximum force on the smallest area,
190 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

anti-tank rounds have aspect ratios of 10:1 or more. Since these cannot be
stabilized by rifling, they are built instead like large darts, with fins pro-
viding the stabilizing force, negating the need for rifling. These subcaliber
rounds are held in place in the bore by sabots. The sabot is a light material
that transfers the pressure of the charge to the penetrator, [and] then is
discarded when the round leaves the barrel.”
—Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Ballistic penetrating power (BPP) deals with the measurement of the bul-
let’s power or ability to successfully penetrate a given target density at a
given initial terminal velocity, and therefore represents the product of the
depth of penetration (Pd) and the differential of the target density (dTp).

Pd
BPP = (1)
dTp

The differential, or the degree of difference, of target densities is the

area of the spectrum of densities, from oxygen (0.0000509 lbs/cu./in.) to
the pure metal rhenium (0.756 lbs/cu/.in.) in which a bullet will success-
fully penetrate.
If we were to increase the depth of penetration, in any given target and
material, then we increase the BPP.
When we increase the target density, for a given bullet, we decrease
the BPP.
CHAPTER 34

BALLISTIC WORK FUNCTION

“In solid-state physics, the work function (sometimes spelled workfunc-

tion) is the minimum thermodynamic work (i.e. energy) needed to remove
an electron from a solid to a point in the vacuum immediately outside the
solid surface. Here “immediately” means that the final electron position is
far from the surface on the atomic scale, but still too close to the solid to be
influenced by ambient electric fields in the vacuum. The work function is
not a characteristic of a bulk material, but rather a property of the surface
of the material (depending on crystal face and contamination).”
—Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For the science of small arms ballistics, we define ballistic work function
(β) as the minimum amount of kinetic energy from a bullet we need to
knock down a target, such as in competitive silhouette shooting events,
without causing damage to that target, or penetrating it, with a given target
and distance from the gun.

β = Wt × Ds (1)

where β is the product of target weight (Wt) and Ds is the distance from
the gun.
When we increase the weight of the target, we increase the work we
need to knock down the target, and when we increase the distance between
the target and the gun, we also increase the amount of work we need to
knock down the target.
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ackley, P. O., (1962). Handbook for Shooters and Reloaders, volumes I and II, by Publish-
ers Press, Salt Lake City.
Derek, B., (2004). Aeromechanical Systems Group, DAPS, RMCS, Cranfield University,
Shrivenham, Swindon, Wiltshire, UK, External Ballistics.
Bliss, G. A., (1944). Mathematics for Exterior Ballistics, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New
York, New York.
Bradley, J. W., (1990). An Alternative Form of the Modified Point-Mass Equation of Mo-
tion, BRL Memorandum Report #3875, Ballistic Research Laboratories, Aberdeen
Proving Ground, Maryland, November.
Carlucci, D., & Sidney, J., (2008). Ballistics: Theory and Design of Guns and Ammunition,
CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, ISBN 13:978-1-4200-6618-0 and 10:1-4200-6618-0.
Cloutier, M., (1972). Methods for Computing Drag Coefficients from Ballistic Range Data
Using the APL System, , DRFV-TN-2027/72, Centre de Recherches Pour la Defense
(Defense Research Establishment), Valcartier.
Corner, J., (1951). Theory of the Interior Ballistics of Guns, 1950, Wiley.
Cummings, C. S., (1950). Everyday Ballistics, 2nd Edn., Stackpole & Heck, Inc., New
York, ASIN: B0007IXU6Q.
Dickinson, E. R., (1964). Aerodynamic Effects of Blunting a Projectile Nose, BRL Memo-
randum Report #1956, Ballistic Research Laboratories, Aberdeen Proving Ground,
Maryland.
Duncan, L., & Engebos, B., (1967). A Six-Degree-of-Freedom Digital Computer Program
for Trajectory Simulation, AD664116, Atmospheric Sciences Laboratory, White
Sands Missile Range, New Mexico.
Farrar, C. L., & Leeming, D. W., (1983). Military Ballistics: A Basic Manual, 225 pages,
27.00 (ISBN 0.08.028342-X).
Hall, A. R., (1952). Ballistics in the Seventeenth Century, Cambridge.
Hager, W. W., DeJarnette, F. R., & Moore, F. G., (1977). Optimal Projectile Shapes for
Minimum Total Drag, NSWC TR-79-18, Dalhgren, Virginia.
Harvard University, (1948). Computation Laboratory Tables for the Design of Missiles,
Harvard University Press, Oxford.
Hatcher, J. S., (1962). Hatcher’s Notebook, 3rd edition, Stackpole, ISBN 0811707954.
Hatcher, J. S., Wilhelm, G. P., & Malony, H. J., (1917). Machine Guns, Menasha, Wisc.
George Banta Pub. Co., [Riling 1833].
Hatcher, J. S., (1927). Pistols and Revolvers and Their Use, Marshallton, Del., Small-Arms
Technical Pub. Co., [Riling 2017].
Hatcher, J. S., (1935). Textbook of Pistols and Revolvers, Onslow County, N.C., Small-
Arms Technical Pub. Co., [Riling 2170].
Hatcher, J. S., (1935). Textbook of Firearms Investigation, Plantersville, S.C., Small-Arms
Technical Pub. Co., [Riling 2171].
194 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

Hatcher, J. S., (1947). Hatcher’s Notebook, Harrisburg, Pa., Military Service Pub. Co.,
[Riling 2596].
Hatcher, J. S., (1947). The Book of the Garand, Washington, Infantry Journal Press, [Ril-
ing 2645].
Hatcher, J. S., Al Barr, H. P., White, C., & Neumann, L., Handloading, Washington, Na-
tional Rifle Association of America, [Riling 2722].
Hayes, T. J., (1940). Exterior Ballistics, Wiley.
Hermann, E. E., (1930). Exterior Ballistics, [2d ed] 30 U.S. Naval Institute.
Hermann, E. E., (1930). Range and Ballistic Tables, [2d ed] U.S. Naval Institute.
Hitchcock, H. P., (1976). Aerodynamic Data for Spinning Projectiles, BRL Memorandum Re-
port # 620, 1947, Ballistic Research Laboratories, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland.
Hunt, F. R. W., et al. Internal Ballistics, 151 Philosophical Libraries, H.M.S.O.
Krasnov, N. F., Morris, & Deane, N., (1970). Aerodynamics of Bodies of Revolution, Amer-
ican Elsevier Publishing, New York, ISBN 0444000763.
Kooy, J. M. J., & Uytenbogaart, J. W. H., (1947). Ballistics for the Future, McGraw.
Laible, R. C., (1980). Ballistic Materials and Penetration Mechanics (Methods & Methods
Ser: vol. 5), 64.00.
Lieske, R. F., & Danberg, J. E., (1992). Modified Point Mass Trajectory Simulation for
Base-Burn Projectiles, , AD-A248 292, Ballistic Research Laboratories, Aberdeen
Proving Ground, Maryland.
Lister, C. B., (1944). Simplified Small Arms Ballistics, NRA.
Litz, B., (2009). Applied Ballistics for Long Range Shooting, Applied Ballistics, LLC.,
ISBN 9780615276618.
Lowry, E. D., (1965). Exterior Ballistics of Small Arms Projectiles, Research Dept., Win-
chester-Western Division, Olin Mathieson Chemical Corporation, ASIN B0007FPINM.
MacNeish, H. F. Elementary Mathematical Theory of Exterior Ballistics, Brooklyn Col-
lege Press, Bedford & Oxford, N.Y.
Mann, F. W., (1980). The Bullet’s Flight From Powder to Target – Ballistics of Small Arms,
Wolfe Pub Co; ISBN 0935632042.
Matunas, E., (1979). American Ammunition & Ballistics.
McCoy, R. L., (1999). Modern Exterior Ballistics The Launch and Flight Dynamics of
Symmetric Projectiles, Schiffer Publishing, Ltd.; ISBN 0764307207.
McShane, E. J., et al. Exterior Ballistics, 153 University of Denver Press.
McShane, K. R., (1953). Exterior Ballistics, University of Denver Press, ASIN: B0007E0YN2.
Moulton, F. R., (1962). Methods in Exterior Ballistics, Dover Publications, Inc., New York,
ISBN 1114518514.
Moore, & Frank G., (1972). Body Alone Aerodynamics of Guided and Unguided Projec-
tiles at Subsonic, Transonic and Supersonic Mach Numbers, Naval Weapons Labora-
tory, AD-754 098, Dahlgren, Virginia.
Rinker, R. A., (1995). Understanding Ballistics, Mulberry House Publishing, Corydon, IN,
ISBN 0964559803.
United States Naval Academy, (1948). Department of Ordnance and Gunnery, Exterior
Ballistics, U.S. Naval Institute.
United States Naval Academy, (1943). Department of Ordnance of Gunnery, Exterior Bal-
listics, 143 pages, U.S. Naval Institute.
INDEX

5 representation, 49–52
temperature, 49–52
5-shot group, 21, 22
automatic
action, 6–8, 10, 17, 89
A
weapon, 6, 8, 17, 89
Academia, 31 Avoirdupois pound, 61
academic community, 74
accuracy, 5, 14, 15, 18, 20, 22–24, 26–28, B
31, 32, 35, 36, 39, 40, 46, 52, 74, 76,
ball park, 31
77, 104, 108, 109, 121, 125, 140, 147,
ballistic, 25, 46, 52, 61, 74, 76, 81, 83,
171, 181
108, 114, 134, 138, 144, 151, 152, 156,
aerodynamic drag, 92, 107, 108, 129 159, 162, 170, 171
air density, 64, 85, 86, 92, 104, 109–111, constraints, 140
123–125, 129, 134, 136, 139, 142, 179 efficiency, 27, 30, 32, 35, 37, 41, 43
AK-47, 165 penetrating power (BPP), 190
algebraic manipulation, 56 phenomena, 46, 52
algorithm, 116, 117, 134, 135, 140, 141, problems, 40
179–181 projectiles, 61
algorithm 1, 116 reflection coefficient (BRC), 185
algorithm 2, 134, 135, 140 reflection power (BRP), 187
algorithm 3, 140, 141 signatures, 156
algorithm 4, 179, 181 spectrum, 187
algorithm 5, 180, 181 tables, 61, 62, 66
ambient temperature, 11, 22, 36, 103, 110 trauma, 131
American uniformity, 38
firearms industry, 61 barometric pressure, 124
military ballistic small arms, 55 barrel, 3, 5–8, 11–14, 19, 20, 24, 26–29,
shooting community, 26, 63 36–41, 46, 47, 50–52, 55, 57, 58, 81, 84,
ammunition, 3, 4, 12, 14, 18–22, 26, 30, 92, 103, 104, 114, 115, 137, 139, 190
31, 35, 37, 40, 41, 46, 69, 75, 85, 89, best
134, 138, 145, 162, 171, 189 bullet length (BBL), 27, 56
designing and reloading, 4 muzzle velocity (BMV), 26, 56
problems and methods, 4 big-game hunting, 172
analysis of random phenomena, 76 black powder, 5–8, 11, 37, 168
angular (spin) kinetic energy, 66 boat-tail configuration, 55, 113, 114
Apollonius of Perga, 45, 53 boiling point, 67
application to reality, 51 bore velocity, 57, 168
artillery projectiles, 55, 60 British thermal units, 86
asymptotic buffer springs, 89
function, 46, 48, 52, 104 building block, 159, 162
196 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

bullet, 3–8, 12–16, 18–21, 24, 26–29, 31, computer program, 116, 134
33–35, 37–40, 46, 55–58, 61–65, 69–71, conic sections, 45
81–87, 92–94, 96, 97, 100, 103, 104, consistent accuracy, 14, 15, 30
108–119, 124, 125, 129, 131–134, 136, conversion formulas, 67
138–140, 142, 145, 146, 152, 154–159, copper-zinc jackets, 168, 169
161–181, 187, 189–191 coriolis effect, 47, 104, 105, 108, 143
density, 165, 166, 175 Corn cob, 30, 41, 42
diameter, 12, 167, 175 Corn meal, 30
length, 20, 55 correct powder (CP), 12, 14–18, 21
mass, 171 Correlis effect, 115, 144, 145
types, 69, 71 cross-wind, 121
velocity, 63, 175 cylinder, 5, 24, 27, 29, 38, 55, 64, 65, 97,
weight, 4, 20, 27, 85, 116, 141 108, 112–116, 140, 174, 178, 180
Bullseye, 9, 29 drag compression, 112
burning powder, 4, 5, 8, 28, 37, 92
D
C
damp air density, 64, 124, 125
caliber, 4, 6, 19, 20, 26, 27, 29, 39, 40, 43, dangerous game, 173, 174, 181
114, 115, 124, 131–134, 139, 145, 167, datum points, 75
172, 187, 189 density, 64, 65, 92, 108, 110, 112,
Camp Curtis Guild, 46 123–125, 134, 153–159, 162, 163,
carrying threshold, 89 165–167, 169, 171, 173–175, 177, 178,
cartridge, 4, 6–8, 10–12, 14, 18–23, 27, 29, 189, 190
30, 33–35, 37, 39, 40, 43, 137, 138, 151 diameter, 7, 10, 12, 19, 23, 26, 34, 36, 38,
Celsius scale, 67 39, 55, 56, 63, 65, 114, 134, 165– 167,
central tendency, 31, 75, 77 171–175, 189
chamber, 4, 6–8, 10–12, 14, 18–20, 23, 24,
downrange, 5, 8, 10, 12–15, 20, 22–24, 28,
27, 29, 38, 76, 92, 103, 167
30, 34, 39, 46, 51, 52, 58, 65, 76, 84,
characteristic, 3–7, 10–12, 14, 22, 28–30,
100, 104, 111–113, 121, 134, 140, 168
34, 38, 41, 43, 53, 81, 82, 85, 89, 92,
drill bit, 23
103, 129, 138, 178
curve, 12, 14, 48, 50–52, 86–89, 96
E
chronographic
readings, 74 Earth’s
screens, 21, 22, 84 atmosphere, 65, 123
climate, 89, 127, 134 rotation, 115, 144
coastal artillery, 144 surface, 85, 86, 88, 94
cold temperatures, 37 effect of
comparison chart, 4, 7, 8 gravity, 97, 100, 101, 108
smokeless gunpowders, 9 modulating time, 100
competition, 19, 38, 90 electromagnetic
composition, 5, 129, 162, 167, 175, 176 forces, 82
compression, 100, 111, 112–116, 129, 134, phenomena, 154, 157, 161, 162
140, 174, 180 electronic chronograph, 33, 75
computations, 48, 86, 108, 109, 111, 119, electrostatic charge, 65, 96
135, 155, 178 elevation, 115, 124, 127
Index 197

Eleventh general conference on weights G

and measures, 67
Geometry, 69
elliptical path, 88
grasslands, 170
encyclopedia, 45, 60, 63, 69, 73–76, 81,
Gravitation, 99
83, 99, 107, 109, 123, 127, 129, 131, gravitational forces, 82
132, 137, 143, 147, 151, 153, 161, 171, Gravity, 62, 96, 99, 100
178, 185, 190, 191 modulation, 100
Equator, 62, 100 Greek letter sigma, 75
Ethical hunters, 151 gun, 3, 5, 6, 11, 12, 14, 18–23, 26, 28, 29,
evil genius, 47 32, 38–41, 46, 47, 50–52, 62, 74, 75,
expected value, 75 84, 85, 89, 100, 103, 104, 107, 108,
explosion, 5, 7, 155 109, 131, 132, 134, 138, 144–148, 165,
explosive collision, 170 167–171, 177, 187, 189, 191
extreme spread (ES), 21, 22, 32, 33, 35, gunpowder, 3–6, 8, 11, 12, 14, 20, 27, 28, 35,
36, 43, 74, 76, 77 85, 89, 92, 103, 104, 107, 138, 167, 168
manufacturer, 4
F technical assistance, 7
Fahrenheit scale, 67 gunshot wound (GSW), 131, 132
fast-burning powders, 27, 29
fastest H
pistol powder, 29 H-335, 9, 12
rifle powder see, automatic weapons, 6
DuPont Chemical Company, 8 H-570, 10
IMR-4227, 8 handgun, 6, 19, 22, 23, 37, 38, 40, 90, 109,
feet per second, 10, 55, 62, 127, 168 139, 169
feltrecoil, 30 hardened targets, 134
field harmonics, 33
artillery, 144 heat, 154, 157, 161, 162
effect, 31, 83, 85–88, 92, 93, 96, 97, 99, high-velocity jacketed bullets, 174
100, 104, 108, 115, 124, 129 HS-5, 9, 29
characteristic curve, 96 hunting, 19, 27, 28, 134, 167–169, 172
phenomenon, 85
theory, 85, 88 I
firearm, 12, 38, 107, 131, 147, 151 ignition temperature, 37
manufactures, 90 improved military rifle (IMR), 6, 8–12, 29
Flat-Nose (FN), 70 IMR-3031, 8–10
flatter trajectory, 92, 104, 173 see, automatic weapons, 6
flight path, 58, 62, 63, 64, 81, 83, 85–87, IMR-4064, 11
92, 93, 97, 104, 108, 110–118, 124, 136, IMR-4198, 10
139, 140, 142, 155, 157, 158, 163, 178, IMR-4227, 8–10, 12
179 IMR-4320, 8, 11
flinching, 22, 27, 28 IMR-4350, 8, 11
fluid mechanics, 178 IMR-4831, 8, 10–12
forward velocity, 64, 145 initial terminal velocity, 155, 175, 185
freezing point, 67 intelligence, 168
198 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

Interior ballistics, 3 machinegun, 19, 27, 115

International System of Units, 67 magnitude, 100, 101
Magnum, 23, 26, 28
J cartridges, 23, 26
jackets, 134, 168, 170, 173, 174 pistol, 36
joules, 65, 137 primer, 37
manipulation, 49, 155, 156, 162, 166, 167,
K 169, 175
manufacturing process, 5, 12, 108
kinetic energy (KE), 27, 59–66, 81, mass, 59–61, 63, 64, 108, 114, 123–125,
84–86, 92, 100, 108–117, 123, 132, 129, 131, 154, 155, 171
133, 135–137, 140–142, 144, 153–157, energy equivalence formula, 60
161–163, 165, 170, 172–175, 177, 179, in motion, 60
180, 185, 187, 191 velocity, 59
mathematical
L abstraction, 52
Lapping compound, 38 relationship, 57, 59, 86, 93, 100, 157
laws of twist, 56 mathematics, 46, 48, 69, 73, 74, 76, 109
lead alloy, 6, 14, 24, 134, 167, 168 maximum
bullet, 40 chamber pressure, 4, 76
lease resistance, 133 effective range, 28, 40, 100, 137–142
length, 7, 10, 12, 13, 19–23, 26, 27, 34, range of lethality, 40, 100, 134, 135, 179
36, 37, 39–41, 55, 56, 93, 103, 113, 114, mean average, 74, 75, 77, 158
129, 137, 189 measurements, 67, 75, 128
less effective method, 22 metal jackets, 133
lethal metallurgical flaw, 34
energy, 132 meter-kilogram-second system (MKS), 67
kinetic energy, 64, 132, 133, 155, 170, micrometer, 38, 39
172–174 military services, 114
lethality, 112, 114, 115, 131–134, 140, modern physics, 60
172, 178, 180 moisture, 124, 139
level of momentum, 20, 85, 86, 92, 100, 108, 115,
competency, 90 132, 139, 154, 189
lethality, 114 Motherearth, 170
light, 20, 59, 61, 64, 65, 85, 90, 96, 115, Muzzle
123, 129, 154, 161, 162, 189, 190 loading community, 63
Little method, 111, 123 velocity, 10, 18–22, 24, 26–43, 55, 56,
load to load, 14, 15 58, 60, 64, 74–77, 86, 92, 103, 104,
Loss through transfer of energy (LTTE), 109, 110, 118, 121, 129, 131, 137,
107, 111, 116, 117, 119, 123, 140, 155, 139–141, 165, 167, 168, 177
178–180
lubricant, 14, 34, 38, 47, 89, 168, 169, 173 N
NATO, 107, 135, 137, 189
M noise, 154, 161, 162
M-16, 6, 17, 27, 132, 165 level, 86
M-16A1, 7, 8 Northern Hemisphere, 104, 108, 143–145
Index 199

Nose drag compression, 111 rate of

nose-fed bullet mold, 39 deceleration, 112, 114
number of scores, 75, 77 spin, 57, 58
numerical data, 73, 74, 77 twist, 3, 12, 18–22, 26–29, 31, 32, 37,
38, 40, 55–58, 139
O real-time study, 87, 104
Oatmeal, 30 receiver, 3, 6, 10, 11, 103
observations, 75, 108 recoil, 19, 22, 27, 28, 30, 33, 85, 86, 89, 138
operating efficiency, 14 Red Dot, 9, 29–31, 34–36, 40, 41, 43
reflection, 64, 152, 161, 162, 185, 187
P energy (RE), 161, 162, 185, 187
relationship
parabolic trajectory, 63, 64, 92, 104, 108, clarification, 174
173 manipulation, 158
paranoid psychotic, 47 reloading, 4, 8, 18, 23, 30, 39, 41, 62, 84, 171
pattern techniques, 39
dispersion, 75, 77, 140 remaining case capacity (RCC), 4, 7,
relationships, 28, 31, 32, 35, 45, 46, 81, 14–16, 18–22, 27, 29, 35, 37, 41
152, 166 rifle, 6, 8, 12, 19, 22, 23, 29, 33, 36, 37,
penetration, 63, 64, 76, 86, 100, 108, 40, 109, 139, 145, 147, 169
110–114, 116, 117, 124, 132, 133, 136, powders, 9
142, 152, 155, 156, 158, 159, 163–167, rotary motion pattern, 100
169–181, 187, 189, 190 roundness, 22, 24, 39, 108
philosophy, 25, 46, 60 Round-Nose (RN), 70
physical
attributes, 70, 71, 82, 178 S
environment, 3, 81, 104
phenomena, 3, 52 scientific study, 3, 81, 152
Pistol powders, 9 self-defense, 19, 90, 176, 187
Point target, 137 semi-automatic, 6, 17
potential energy, 5, 60, 154 Semi-Wad cutter (SWC), 69
powders, 6–8, 10, 12, 18, 21–23, 27, 29, seven o’clock, 85–87, 103, 104
30, 36, 37 ship artillery, 144
prediction, 66, 76, 77, 117, 134, 140 shooter’s origin, 162
probability, 52, 74, 76, 77 shooting community, 4, 31, 40, 61, 62,
progression of curves, 83, 88–90, 96 67–69, 74, 76, 77, 129
progressive burning, 5, 8 shot to shot, 24, 30, 84
projected illumination, 65 shotgun, 6, 12, 19, 29, 33, 40, 128
Pyrodex, 37 powders, 9
shot-to-shot, 12, 14, 51
Q sky fall faster, 62
slow-burning powders, 29
quantum mechanics, 60 slower powder, 8, 17
slowest-burning pistol powders, 29
R small arm ballistics, 57, 61, 66, 74, 94, 96,
radio waves, 154, 161, 162 101, 109, 132, 138, 144, 145, 155, 162,
rail-road track mechanism, 84, 86 191
200 The Science of Small Arms Ballistics

smokeless gunpowders, 6 theoretical physics, 60

sniper’s position, 159 Theory of
Soil-vegetation-atmosphere-transfer penetration, 177
(SVAT), 123 twist, 18, 26, 27
Solar thermodynamics, 178
conduction, 85–87, 93 thickness, 7, 10, 12, 22, 23, 34, 167,
convection, 85–87, 93 169–173, 175, 176
energy, 85, 86, 92, 96, 99–101, 108 Time of flight (TOF), 92, 96, 101, 108,
solution, 28, 38, 41, 168, 177 109, 118, 121, 129
source of energy, 85 time-pressure, 4–8, 10–14, 23, 24, 27–29,
Southern Hemisphere, 104, 108, 143, 144 31, 37, 41, 89, 92, 103, 168
Spectroanalytic program, 134 curve, 10, 12, 92
speed of light, 59–61 total drag compression, 113
spitzer bullets, 132 trajectory, 20, 40, 61, 62, 66, 76, 82, 92,
w/boat-tail, 72 94, 96, 97, 100, 104, 107–111, 117–119,
Spitzer point (SP), 69, 70 123–125, 129, 134, 139, 140, 145, 159,
boat-tail (SPBT), 70 162, 173, 177, 178
square root of the square of the sums, 75 velocity, 92, 140
stabilization, 51, 58 transfer of energy (TE), 64, 65, 86, 97,
Standard deviation (SD), 21, 22, 24, 28, 100, 108–112, 114–116, 123, 129, 134,
31–33, 35, 43, 74, 75, 77, 171, 173 136, 140, 142, 152–159, 163, 172, 174,
Statistical 175, 177, 179, 180
data, 31, 33 trial-and-error system, 169, 170, 176
tools, 31, 74, 77 tungsten carbide, 134, 189
statistics, 31, 73–75, 77, 131, 158 typical appearance, 11
submachinegun, 19
sum of the squares, 75 U
summation, 64, 75, 77, 86, 87, 93, 163 uncorrected barometric pressure (UBP),
Sun, 65, 82, 84–88, 92, 94–96, 99–101, 124
103, 104 uniformity, 14, 22, 23, 30, 37–39, 43
sunlight, 83, 85, 88, 96, 108, 110 uranium, 134, 167, 189
System International, 67
V
T
varminters, 169
tank’s armor, 168 varminting, 169–172
target, 8, 19, 22, 28, 46, 47, 63, 64, 65, 81, vector relationship, 100, 101
84–86, 90, 100, 104, 108–110, 118, 121, velocity, 12–14, 20–22, 27, 28, 31, 33–37,
129, 131, 134, 137–139, 144, 147, 148, 40–43, 57–59, 61–65, 85, 86, 92, 94,
151, 152, 154–157, 159, 161–169, 171, 96, 97, 100, 103, 104, 108, 110–118,
173–181, 185, 187, 189–191 121, 124, 127, 129, 132, 134, 135, 139,
density, 154, 155, 165, 166, 167, 175, 190 140, 144, 145, 151, 154–159, 161, 162,
practice, 19, 168 165–171, 173–175, 177, 179, 180, 185,
weight, 191 187, 189, 190
temperature, 7, 34, 35, 41, 43, 46–48, first interval, 118
50–52, 67, 68, 73, 84, 85, 88, 89, 92, 93, very slow rifle powders
104, 123, 124, 128, 134, 157–159, 162 see H-570, 6
Index 201

see IMR-4831, 6 wintertime, 13, 90

volume, 123, 124, 137, 155, 178 wooden, 132, 133
dowel structure, 133
W structure, 133
World War I, 114
Wad cutter (WC), 69
World War II, 108, 114, 171
weapon, 6, 131, 134, 137, 138, 162
wound ballistics, 151
Weight, 61, 135, 179, 181
Westfield Sportsman Club, 46, 83, 108 Y
Wikipedia, 45, 60, 63, 69, 73–76, 81, 83,
yardstick, 84
99, 107, 109, 123, 127, 129, 131, 132,
137, 143, 147, 151, 153, 161, 171, 178,
Z
185, 190, 191
Wind deflection, 121 zigzagged, 133