.50 cal ballistics data

[blinket]

im glad you found my thoughts useful sid haha

although you did expand where i couldnt!

But on the subject of scenario, its easy to run out of air, 20 min-2 hour games its quite easy as you can imagine. The advantage of the 50cal would be you could fire more pellets for the same amount of air in a big scenario game. Saves a treck back to the respawn site to gas up as often.

 

[Devrij]

Dude, this is what I was saying the whole time when this came up: the physics don't work out. Consider also that smaller spheres are stronger so lower velocity+stronger shell = bounces. This all depends, however, on the reliability of the ballistics calculator used. Especially considering that a paintball isn't a solid sphere. So basically we're going to be shooting 450fps if we want the game to resemble that of today. Hmmm

 

[blinket]

and it seems reasonable to assume the higher the velocity the more air thats used, which could cancel out the point of .50 and being able to shoot more per fill....

so the point of .50 is...what?...

 

[3L1TE hax]

MONEY!!!! and nothing else

 

[Robbo]

One other (unrelated and quite possibly incorrect) rumor mentioned on a number of other forums is that after Richmond Italia sold his stake in Procaps he was paid off, but part of that package was a 'non-competition' clause, preventing him from producing paint to compete with Procaps (i.e. standard .68 cal).....and now suddenly he's promoting .50.

<Insert conspiracy theory here>.

Gadge, Richmond isn't a silly man and in no way would he compromise his non-compete contract condition in such a blatant way.
He is in negotiation with Procaps regrading this non-compete and they are fully aware of what Richmond is doing and in fact, Richmond would have been given the all-clear by Procaps or his own personal lawyers before he did anything involved in paintball.

 

[Robbo]

Consider also that smaller spheres are stronger

Dev, so what you are saying is, the shell properties have no bearing on a paintball's strength???
Are you seriously suggesting that?

 

[Gadget]

Gadge, Richmond isn't a silly man and in no way would he compromise his non-compete contract condition in such a blatant way.
He is in negotiation with Procaps regrading this non-compete and they are fully aware of what Richmond is doing and in fact, Richmond would have been given the all-clear by Procaps or his own personal lawyers before he did anything involved in paintball.

Sorry, wasn't trying to imply that he was doing anything dodgy - just wondered if the non-compete was along the lines of "thou shalt not make .68 paint", which may have encouraged him to investigate the use of a different caliber ball?

One comment I saw on another forum made me chuckle - came from Tom Kaye and was along the lines of "I tried that and failed, but Richmond has made a shed-load more money out of paintball than I ever did, so maybe he's right."

 

[Devrij]

Dev, so what you are saying is, the shell properties have no bearing on a paintball's strength???
Are you seriously suggesting that?

I'm saying that making a shell fragile enough to break on people and not in breeches will be harder than it already is due to the smaller tolerances needed. This is one of the problems that is actually workable, but the velocity issue is defined by the laws of physics and one which many of us said would be a problem from the start. This flight prediction is just a visual way of saying what a lot of people were saying months ago: we'll need higher velocities or it's going to be rubbish.

 

[Robbo]

I'm saying that making a shell fragile enough to break on people and not in breeches will be harder than it already is due to the smaller tolerances needed. This is one of the problems that is actually workable, but the velocity issue is defined by the laws of physics and one which many of us said would be a problem from the start. This flight prediction is just a visual way of saying what a lot of people were saying months ago: we'll need higher velocities or it's going to be rubbish.

Dev, I'm well aware of the laws of physics and how they apply to paintball ballistics; for you to describe .50 cal 'rubbish' is an infantile comment based upon what????
Your understanding of the laws of physics ??

Well, thank god Richmond didn't use you as his technical touchstone.
Personally, I'd like to think I would be a lot more opinionated after I had seen and fired the paint rather than condemning it out of hand as you are.

I know Richmond, I don't know you other than what you post on here and let me tell ya something ... if my money's on anyone, it's on Richmond rather than somebody who indulges in bar-room physics.

I'm afraid Richmond did not become a multi-millionaire by indulging himself in 'rubbish' Dev, I don't think you have rationalised this properly Dev, try looking at it from top down rather than bottom up; and by that I mean, look at the man behind it all and then make your predictions as to whether it's 'rubbish' or not.

From your posts, you like to take contrary positions, much like teenagers when growing up, but to do this, you need to be able to back it up; and so let's hope you can do just that especially, when you begin bandying around the laws of physics.

 

[blinket]

Robbo i'l admit, i havnt fired .50 cal, i havn't inspected it, and i am most certainly not a physicist. But, looking at all the evidence provided so far (which i will agree to being preliminary and mostly hypothetical data) you have to think that .50 cal does carry some flaws to it.

I can also understand a point of view that everything when it starts off is to be evolved and redesigned and the flaws worked out. So although Dev may not be a physicist, he has picked up on that there may be a flaw with .50 cal. However i do not think it is with the shell, before i comment here i have to add again, i am not a physicist, but, since .68 tourny grade shells are perfected (arguable opinion i know but humour me), does it not stand to reason that .50 is simply a scaled down version of .68, therefore although the size of the round is smaller, a similar ratio of shell density to fill will bring promising results? And in breeches, yes, the shell thickness will be reduced, but thinking logically, because there is less weigh being proppeled (.50 cal being lighter than .68) would it not stand to reason that not as much force is required to move the pellet and therefore less force will be exerted onto the shell meaning that the redefined tollerances and dimensions of .50 cal shell will allow it to fire without breaking int he breech as you mentioned?

However i cannot comment on the velocity issue, that realy IS for physicists to analyse. The modeld outcomes and performances of .50 cal did not lok promising. But im sure those clever clever boys and girls with big shiny deplomas who are very excentric will solve it!

And Robbo, i will say that as successfull as Richmond has been, and he may well be right again (which is of high possibility) that even the smartest people and the most successful people make mistakes. Stephen Hawkins (arguably the smartest person int he world) has made mistakes before. I am not condemming Richmond or his investment, but people get things wrong. Remember, i am not condemming Richmond, nor am i condemming Dev, but we need to see how everything pans out.

.50 cal needs to be given a fair chance to shine and prove itself before it can be fully judged. Yes, people can look at the pros and cons (as i have done earlier in this thread) but judgement cant be made until it has had a chance to blossom.

I know any number of people could probably flame this entire post, but its only an opinion, id rather be proved wrong and discuss my opinion than have it flamed though guys!

Cheers