Does this make sense?
Ok, I was reviewing my collection of Web Dog Tip Clip videos and was reminded of of a thought I used to ponder. According to Tyger, TK explained some very simple math to him that we all probably would've known had we ever thought about it (or I). If a string of paint was flying in the air at an equal 300fps at 10bps, that's roughly 30ft of space between each ball. Now, without equating in arc or the speed at which they fall or air resistence, that's a .2667 second gap between shots (assuming all fly in a straight path to an exact 80ft detination).
I don't know about you guys, but my friend says that is plenty of time to run through the line IF in a full sprint. I would say vaguely possible to near impossible, but, it serves a good point:
Do we really need higher rates of fire? At just 10 bps, there is already that tiny of a time gap, so I figure, wouldn't reducing velocities lower the gap even more? Instead of 30ft between 80ft long shots at .2667 seconds, it would be more like 28ft (280fps) between 80ft long shots at x<0.2667 seconds? (I tried calculating it out, but I'm not sure of a good approximation of distance at this velocity). The way I see it, the lower the velocity, the lesser the speed gaps.
Now, also figure this: many people are fully capable of firing streams in bursts of approx. 15bps. That would change the numbers around a bit, but tremendously decreases the time gap by a full 1/3. We always say more than 15bps is unneccessary and wasteful (though impressive), and always argue that a human finger cannot pull that fast anyway (which has potential to be true, at least in many cases); so why hasn't anyone argued this point? Not only is the whole 20+ thing wastefull, uneccessary, inaccurate, but even impractical!
Now, I know there are alot of physics and calc. that alter things quite a bit, but stating narrowly, wouldn't this prove the point a bit better?
Either way, it'll shut the little AGG kids up over at the Nation.
-And yeah, I did think this all up my self
/at work
- and yeah, work really is that boring
//really
I don't know about you guys, but my friend says that is plenty of time to run through the line IF in a full sprint. I would say vaguely possible to near impossible, but, it serves a good point:
Do we really need higher rates of fire? At just 10 bps, there is already that tiny of a time gap, so I figure, wouldn't reducing velocities lower the gap even more? Instead of 30ft between 80ft long shots at .2667 seconds, it would be more like 28ft (280fps) between 80ft long shots at x<0.2667 seconds? (I tried calculating it out, but I'm not sure of a good approximation of distance at this velocity). The way I see it, the lower the velocity, the lesser the speed gaps.
Now, also figure this: many people are fully capable of firing streams in bursts of approx. 15bps. That would change the numbers around a bit, but tremendously decreases the time gap by a full 1/3. We always say more than 15bps is unneccessary and wasteful (though impressive), and always argue that a human finger cannot pull that fast anyway (which has potential to be true, at least in many cases); so why hasn't anyone argued this point? Not only is the whole 20+ thing wastefull, uneccessary, inaccurate, but even impractical!
Now, I know there are alot of physics and calc. that alter things quite a bit, but stating narrowly, wouldn't this prove the point a bit better?
Either way, it'll shut the little AGG kids up over at the Nation.
-And yeah, I did think this all up my self
/at work
- and yeah, work really is that boring
//really
)
Yay for post 200! It only took me a few years... 
Comment