3 ms·

All of the infographics on that site don't show bullets being fired, they show whole cartridges. It's also talking about bullet weights and speeds, and complete

All of the infographics on that site don't show bullets being fired, they show whole cartridges. It's also talking about bullet weights and speeds, and completely skips the concept of "energy" (i.e. Joules) which is what actually matters for this analysis. Additionally, they seem to assume that the trajectories are always perfectly ballistic, and that the projectile never begins to tumble or otherwise present any sort of wind resistance. It just screams that the people involved in the process have never actually been anywhere near any firearms. This makes it extremely difficult for me to believe that any sort of intellectual rigor went into any of it. Not that I believe firing guns in the air is a good idea, mind you, but this is lazy.

fogof 4y ago
They address this at the end of the article > Our calculations account for air drag and the effects of gravity. > While the return velocity is dependent upon a number of factors, firing angle is extremely important. Bullets fired at an angle maintain their angular ballistic trajectory and are less likely to tumble, allowing them to pick up more speed on the way down. You make a good point about the infographic showing a cartridge being fired, but as far as I can tell there is only one infographic on the page that actually shows this. These factors make me suspect that you didn't actually read the article to the end before criticizing it. "Intellectual rigor" indeed.