[Image] The Picture and GIF thread
- Thread starter kapulA
- Start date
bad news, the butterflies have elected hitler butterfly. The new butterflyreich is on the rise
I'd actually love to try and drink from that mug. Looks challenging. Impossible, even.
Last edited:
Bah! The bullets pass through him but don't deflect off the bratwurst and limburger sandwich in his bag. Where is the realism Tripwire!?!?!??!
No, seriously, now I'm hungry after typing that.
No, seriously, now I'm hungry after typing that.
Has anybody noticed how the dead body moves as the guy falls dead to the ground? That's awesome :IS2:
I like how the soldiers right leg buckles from the first shot in this gif.
If that is blood pooled on the walk way behind him (from bullet penetration I would presume) then perhaps that is a little much. Can't really tell if that spot is already there or not from the gif.
That's wrong. Where is the elastic data of the rubber band??? (I think you call it "elastic modulus" in englishki)
Yep.
HOWEVER we're missing a couple of elements, though. The aerodynamics of the bird are not accounted for anywhere, neither is gravity. Atmospheric conditions, too. You could have an extremely high arc that takes 2.5s to complete at a very high speed, if you have a low drag coefficient (or low atmospheric density) and a high G. Alternatively, you could have a very flat trajectory that takes 2.5s to complete if you have a high atmospheric density and good glide characteristics, or low G and little to no atmosphere.
Hm. This is, however, making me want to pull out my textbooks on ballistics and see what I can come up with ...
Last edited:
Fine, as long as you don't make an Angry Birds mod for RO2:HoS. The bullet ballistics aren't intended for such foolish things! Or are they?
It's just an idealized problem for a Physics I course. Airdrag, density, changing gravity with height, curvature of the Earth and all those other variables you can think of isn't necessary for a problem where the distance traveled is only 55m. The error only becomes apparent at much greater distances, heights and velocities.
You can spend all day accounting for the different variables, and it'll probably give you an answer within 1-2% of the one you get with the kinematics formula.
It's never 100% correct anyway, most things end up being approximations.
You can spend all day accounting for the different variables, and it'll probably give you an answer within 1-2% of the one you get with the kinematics formula.
It's never 100% correct anyway, most things end up being approximations.
