Tiberius Sniper Rounds, Info from TK

[Mayvik]

I lol at all you guys with your single shots. These are going in my SMG68 for "counter-sniping"

[Swamp Thing]

Feed very important

By the look of it the alignment of the ball is going to be very important.

I doubt that a longbow will be able to feed them as the drop out of the longbow into the breach is not tight and the fins will not fit with our traditional round holes in things like longbow mags and such.

Tiberius is behind this because the Tiberius mag feed system feeds directly in a controlled manner into the breach. Even for a Tiberius it requires a new clip system with a different shape to hold the rounds and a new barrel with a different opening.

I think the only type of feed system that is going to work has to feed directly into the breach with no bends or turns. In addition to that the shape of the hole in your barrel will have to be altered to use it.

In short Unless you are gonna feed them one by one you are most likely gonna have to adapt or modify your marker to take any of these in a feed system.

All this being said I think that a spring fed clip for the Micromag could be made to fit that breach system. It would have to stick out of the side like a sten gun but that is not a huge deal.

Swamp

[mostpeople]

here shows Coefficient of drag vs. Reynolds number.



Drag is defined as all factors are universal except coefficient of drag, the reference area is the same (it fits in the same barrels as regular markers. (source)

As you can see from the graph, the Coefficient of friction is around 0.8 at that Reynolds number. Using this source, you can see the approximate drag coefficient on a bullet shape object is 0.297. The cylinder is a bit longer than the "sniper round" but you get the point. It appears, that the drag on a "sniper round" would be higher than that of a sphere.

*Note this does not take into account friction. There is a larger surface area exposed to the axial flow on the sniper round, and therefore this could affect Cd as well.


Unfortunately I do not have my texts anymore, nor do I have any of the proper equipment to do a proper analysis. Thats why I callt his a "hipshot" analysis as its just some supporting evidence that the round may not fly as far as is claimed. To truly know, if the sniper round performs as they say it does we would need an analysis similar to cockerpunk's series of analysis or wind tunnel tests. Thats a little extreme, but hopefully I've made my point, 1 dollar per round that may or may not out-perform a .03 cent round is not what I call being smart with money. I also don't want to see a 'smart parts' type claim where simply because someone says something, its automatically considered true. I post this in the hopes of an in-depth analysis of the round, and if it does turn out to out-perform a standard spherical round more power to it. I however, am skeptical. My belief is that these rounds are equally as accurate, and fly an equal, if not shorter distance. So lets see some proof that they outperform regular paintballs!

The Fn303 argument, someone brought this up. These rounds appear similar to the Fn303 round, but as I understand it those are both heavier, and are fired at a faster velocity than paintball rounds, voiding the argument. Correct me if I am wrong.

[MANN]

If these really are 25x more accurate than a normal paintball, they may allow for actually useful sighting devices

post a thread asking who mr. knight is. some people are accurate wiithout scopes/fins. 25 times maybe 2-3, but not 25.

[MANN]

heck. someone find out where to buy these, and I will stick a few in my viking.

[Sumthinwicked]

swamp put in sniper rounds one at a time if need be... or use first one a sniper round the other 20 be springfeed lb clip aka muzzel load the first shot in the barrel put in the clip u have one in the chamber for the detent and 20 to back it up

[Swamp Thing]

Clip Pics

From the clip pics it looks like the fins will not fit in a standard tiberius magazine. I saw a pic of the new magazine top down and It has a totally different shape. I think if you tried to load them in a standard mag they would either jam or tear the fins off.

Swamp

Here is link to pics of magazine

http://www.techpb.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=15778

[Hilltop Customs]

here shows Coefficient of drag vs. Reynolds number.



Drag is defined as all factors are universal except coefficient of drag, the reference area is the same (it fits in the same barrels as regular markers. (source)

As you can see from the graph, the Coefficient of friction is around 0.8 at that Reynolds number. Using this source, you can see the approximate drag coefficient on a bullet shape object is 0.297. The cylinder is a bit longer than the "sniper round" but you get the point. It appears, that the drag on a "sniper round" would be higher than that of a sphere.

*Note this does not take into account friction. There is a larger surface area exposed to the axial flow on the sniper round, and therefore this could affect Cd as well.


Unfortunately I do not have my texts anymore, nor do I have any of the proper equipment to do a proper analysis. Thats why I callt his a "hipshot" analysis as its just some supporting evidence that the round may not fly as far as is claimed. To truly know, if the sniper round performs as they say it does we would need an analysis similar to cockerpunk's series of analysis or wind tunnel tests. Thats a little extreme, but hopefully I've made my point, 1 dollar per round that may or may not out-perform a .03 cent round is not what I call being smart with money. I also don't want to see a 'smart parts' type claim where simply because someone says something, its automatically considered true. I post this in the hopes of an in-depth analysis of the round, and if it does turn out to out-perform a standard spherical round more power to it. I however, am skeptical. My belief is that these rounds are equally as accurate, and fly an equal, if not shorter distance. So lets see some proof that they outperform regular paintballs!

The Fn303 argument, someone brought this up. These rounds appear similar to the Fn303 round, but as I understand it those are both heavier, and are fired at a faster velocity than paintball rounds, voiding the argument. Correct me if I am wrong.

Trying to compare the two projectiles mathmatically is way to complicated. Slight variations of projectiles can make large differences. I agree on skepticism, but using formulas to attempt disprove the rounds claims is just as bad as repeating the claims without first hand experience with it.

it wouldnt take any in-depth analysis to compare the rounds....fire them at the same velocity, at the same angle, with the same conditions.....whichever flies further is carrying more energy downfield and has less drag.

At a 45 degree angle, it is advertised at 500ft compared to 300ft with conventional paint.

If thats, true then the "sniper round" has less drag. Just wish they would have gave a realistic angle of fire instead of using a high angle to produce a impressive difference between their round and a normal paintball.

I wanna see 2 things:
1st: Targets shot by locked down markers firing both these rounds and standards parintballs.(known distances)
2nd: A video of showing the projectile curve of a standard paintball and this round fired at the same angle and velocity.

I would also be curious about gas usage of these vs standard paintballs.

[mostpeople]

Wait what? You're saying you don't trust math?

What I am saying is that mathematically the claims do not hold up, at least to this old fart. There may be something I didn't consider, there usually is haha, but stll, the numbers don't lie dude.

[Ninjeff]

the more i think about these, the more i like them. I love the idea, and if/when they come out, i'd really love to try them. Especially in a T9 rifle config.

[cockerpunk]

we'll be checking these out, i have some on the way though my sources. we will certianly run some test, take some highspeed (yes, we are getting highspeed) to see what they can do.

seems pretty sweet, i dont doubt that they can outperform a sphere.

[Hilltop Customs]

Wait what? You're saying you don't trust math?

What I am saying is that mathematically the claims do not hold up, at least to this old fart. There may be something I didn't consider, there usually is haha, but stll, the numbers don't lie dude.

Oh, i trust math, but math doesnt guarantee that is the correct drag coefficient to use. Estimating drag coefficient by the general bullet shape of the "sniper round" is not sufficient. The bullet shape coefficient does not account for spin, the fins, the hollow back side of the round, and many other details. You could estimate a golf ball by using a sphere, but then you would use the wrong drag coefficient and results would be way off. I trust concrete, repeatable results more than any estimate.

Mathematically, without the drag coefficient, any calculation done is an estimate. You cant disprove something with an estimate.

[rx2]

post a thread asking who mr. knight is. some people are accurate wiithout scopes/fins. 25 times maybe 2-3, but not 25.

I think that, perhaps, we should be thinking more about precision. I have yet to find a marker that is precise enough where someone could expect reproducible accuracy at more than, say, 50 feet. Even that may be stretching it (I find many people overestimate the distances they actually shoot at). With knuckling, odd arcing, and the like, fliers are the norm. It is impossible to make an imprecise instrument accurate.

Of course, I wouldn't expect exceptional accuracy with these, either - especially with the pistol platform. Most people couldn't hit headshots with an actual pistol, standing at the 50 (I have seen "trained" professionals that are lucky to get shots in the silhouette at this range). Hell, many real pistols simply aren't even that precise, let alone an improved marker. I think that it is more of a pipe-dream that you are going to be gogging people on the snap from long-range; at least for most people. Another problem is with the precision of the markers themselves. You have to keep things tight in order to take advantage of improved accuracy.

Nonetheless, I wouldn't write it off completely. While the 25x improvement may be in relation to the absolute worst case, I wouldn't be surprised to see an improvement well beyond the 2-3x that you surmise.

My concern for this concept is that most people will expect a miracle, find out that they still need to know how to shoot, and thus go on about how these don't work. I will say, though, that as a competitive shooter, I would be interested in seeing just what kind of precision these things can deliver.

[cockerpunk]

I think that, perhaps, we should be thinking more about precision. I have yet to find a marker that is precise enough where someone could expect reproducible accuracy at more than, say, 50 feet. Even that may be stretching it (I find many people overestimate the distances they actually shoot at). With knuckling, odd arcing, and the like, fliers are the norm. It is impossible to make an imprecise instrument accurate.

Of course, I wouldn't expect exceptional accuracy with these, either - especially with the pistol platform. Most people couldn't hit headshots with an actual pistol, standing at the 50 (I have seen "trained" professionals that are lucky to get shots in the silhouette at this range). Hell, many real pistols simply aren't even that precise, let alone an improved marker. I think that it is more of a pipe-dream that you are going to be gogging people on the snap from long-range; at least for most people. Another problem is with the precision of the markers themselves. You have to keep things tight in order to take advantage of improved accuracy.

Nonetheless, I wouldn't write it off completely. While the 25x improvement may be in relation to the absolute worst case, I wouldn't be surprised to see an improvement well beyond the 2-3x that you surmise.

My concern for this concept is that most people will expect a miracle, find out that they still need to know how to shoot, and thus go on about how these don't work. I will say, though, that as a competitive shooter, I would be interested in seeing just what kind of precision these things can deliver.

i disagree.

at 50 feet we saw a CEP of about 2.5 inch radius.

thats more accurate then anyone i know can shoot.

[DevilMan]

The proof will be in the pudding.

Until then it's anyone's game. Those that think it will work will think it will work. Those that don't... won't.

Tis simple.

Let CockerPunk do his tests (You guys could consider donating paint/supplies to the cause) and let it go from there.

Oh and for the record I think it will work not only because of the fins and such but because of the consistency at which they are produced. That's my biggest issue with paint, barrels, guns, etc... if you are consistent you get good results. Variations means poor results. Whether it's paint, reg, tank, etc...

DM