You cant blow someone off their feet per say if you shoot them with a gun, thats why people that get shot just fall to the ground, not get picked up off their feet. Its basic physics, something or another about exerting the same force on the object it effected, dont quite remember. But in other words, if the person that got shot flew five feet backwards, so would the shooter. So a leaping skulk, if killed in mid flight, might slow down a bit, but he would continue foward.. unless point blank with a shotgun. He'd stop. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> But he wouldnt go hardly anywhere.
I hope the dev team looks into implimenting this. Not everyone can run HL2 that well, and this is a fine peice of eye candy to add.
<!--QuoteBegin-Haze+Mar 20 2005, 08:51 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Haze @ Mar 20 2005, 08:51 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> You cant blow someone off their feet per say if you shoot them with a gun, thats why people that get shot just fall to the ground, not get picked up off their feet. Its basic physics, something or another about exerting the same force on the object it effected, dont quite remember. But in other words, if the person that got shot flew five feet backwards, so would the shooter. So a leaping skulk, if killed in mid flight, might slow down a bit, but he would continue foward.. unless point blank with a shotgun. He'd stop. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> But he wouldnt go hardly anywhere.
I hope the dev team looks into implimenting this. Not everyone can run HL2 that well, and this is a fine peice of eye candy to add. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Newton's third law you mean? I don't know what you meant by knocking of their foot, but it's very possible for someone to fling backwards and totally lose their balance when they're shot. But it's not realistic that they would fly several meters as seen in action movies. At least not if they're shot with a handgun.
obuhNot Quite Smart at NSJoin Date: 2003-03-31Member: 15072Members, Constellation
Ragdolls add what to the game ? Oh yeah, effects that look nice the 3 first time you see them. Otherwise it's just a waste of cpu cycles and development time.
When I was talking about getting knocked around, I more meant an Onos gorging a marine. They wouldn't just go *thud* on the floor, they'd go a few feet. Like... it's an Onos. It smashes you with a big horn. You're gonna go a few feet, right?
And if you used, say, an HMG and took the skulk out from an angle, I don't think it would just stop. It would pummle forward, wouldn't it? I mean, you arent't putting a lot of stopping force on it directly or anything.
Alcapwn"War is the science of destruction" - John AbbotJoin Date: 2003-06-21Member: 17590Members
<!--QuoteBegin-DarkFrost+Mar 20 2005, 11:57 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (DarkFrost @ Mar 20 2005, 11:57 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Did they write their own ragdoll code, or modify the commented out code already in the combat.cpp in HL SDK? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Theres ragdoll code already in the Hl1 SDK??
<!--QuoteBegin-Ice9+Mar 19 2005, 01:57 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Ice9 @ Mar 19 2005, 01:57 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> The bottom line is this: If you want ragdoll physics, Half-Life 1 isn't the game/engine you want. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> yeah, who needs innovation.
<!--QuoteBegin-WaterBoy+Mar 20 2005, 06:54 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (WaterBoy @ Mar 20 2005, 06:54 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-DarkFrost+Mar 20 2005, 11:57 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (DarkFrost @ Mar 20 2005, 11:57 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Did they write their own ragdoll code, or modify the commented out code already in the combat.cpp in HL SDK? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Theres ragdoll code already in the Hl1 SDK?? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Yes, but its commented out, stating that it should be un commented when the bounding box issues are fixed. Physics libraries have little to do with rag dolls <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> from what i heard they coded in a physics engine seperate from valve's code<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Thats cool, I tryed giving HL water more real life feel and only succeded in making it crash everytime I entered the water <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Misfire+Mar 21 2005, 05:33 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Misfire @ Mar 21 2005, 05:33 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> from what i heard they coded in a physics engine seperate from valve's code <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> There is more or less a physics engine in all games. In its simplest form it'll just be gravity sim.
<!--QuoteBegin-XCan+Mar 20 2005, 05:47 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (XCan @ Mar 20 2005, 05:47 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-Haze+Mar 20 2005, 08:51 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Haze @ Mar 20 2005, 08:51 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> You cant blow someone off their feet per say if you shoot them with a gun, thats why people that get shot just fall to the ground, not get picked up off their feet. Its basic physics, something or another about exerting the same force on the object it effected, dont quite remember. But in other words, if the person that got shot flew five feet backwards, so would the shooter. So a leaping skulk, if killed in mid flight, might slow down a bit, but he would continue foward.. unless point blank with a shotgun. He'd stop. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo--> But he wouldnt go hardly anywhere.
I hope the dev team looks into implimenting this. Not everyone can run HL2 that well, and this is a fine peice of eye candy to add. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Newton's third law you mean? I don't know what you meant by knocking of their foot, but it's very possible for someone to fling backwards and totally lose their balance when they're shot. But it's not realistic that they would fly several meters as seen in action movies. At least not if they're shot with a handgun. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Thats what I mean. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Hl:enhanced is awesome, even for Hl1. if they eventually got around to finishing it, it would be better than Hl:source.
I remember watching the videos of the grunt picking up your grenade then throwing it back at you, or Barney walking up to a shotgun on the ground, then picking it up <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-WaterBoy+Mar 20 2005, 01:54 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (WaterBoy @ Mar 20 2005, 01:54 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-DarkFrost+Mar 20 2005, 11:57 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (DarkFrost @ Mar 20 2005, 11:57 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Did they write their own ragdoll code, or modify the commented out code already in the combat.cpp in HL SDK? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Theres ragdoll code already in the Hl1 SDK?? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Cool, rag dolls in a 6-year old game? Good thing they didn't include them, cause then it would be just plain hax.
<!--QuoteBegin-Grendel+Mar 21 2005, 12:08 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Grendel @ Mar 21 2005, 12:08 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> People barely stagger when hit by assault rifle rounds. Even emplaced machine guns barely cause a wobble.
F=MA owns you.
(Force=MassxAcceleration)
Do the math. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Thanks. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-Grendel+Mar 21 2005, 07:08 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Grendel @ Mar 21 2005, 07:08 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> People barely stagger when hit by assault rifle rounds. Even emplaced machine guns barely cause a wobble.
F=MA owns you.
(Force=MassxAcceleration)
Do the math. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Do the math of what? There are more than one thing that can decide wether or not you fall over from being shot. A machine gun's rounds are stronger than a handgun, but at the same time there's much larger chance that it would pierce its target rather than get stuck on the bone.
Also the shooter normally would carry the gun at shoulder level while shooting, creating a momentum that's smaller than the target if its hit on the head. This is if we put the rotation-center at one's feet.
<b>M</b>=<b>F</b>x|r|
The bolded are arrays, and the x is really cross-product and not multiplication.
GrendelAll that is fear...Join Date: 2002-07-19Member: 970Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, NS2 Playtester
A bullet simply does not have the force to knock someone over, or even back. Let's assume that you are hit by a .50 cal machine-gun round, which is at the very upper end of the spectrum of weaponry that is likely to be used on a human target (and is not even man portable).
The mass of a browning .50 cal is around 84 lbs, which is approximately half the weight of a human being. The distance the slide travels in recoil from this is only a couple of inches. This is due to both the effects of the bullet and the effects of the vented gas utilised in the propulsion.
Significantly less energy is actually imparted into the target. First of all, we can discount the recoil caused by the venting of gas. Secondly, significant amounts of energy are lost due to friction. By the time the projectile hits the target, you are looking at a "knockback" effect of about an inch, presuming that the target was the same weight as the firing system.
However, a man is roughly double the weight, so the force is halved. Additionally, in the case of a supersonic round above 5.56mm, the bullet generally travels through the target, retaining a significant proportion of its momentum. The net effect is that knockback is negligible. Ironically, more "knockback" occurs with weapons of a lower calibre, as more of their energy is imparted to the target. The nonsense of knockback can be demonstrated by watching pheasant shooting. They simply flutter to the ground, rather than fly backwards from the shot and they weigh only a few pounds.
Knockback occurs when you punch someone in the face, not when you shoot them. But don't take my word for it, try shooting some real guns. Or watch footage of a military firefight.
Or read through the explanations given <a href='http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_of_firearms' target='_blank'>here</a> or <a href='http://www.bsharp.org/physics/stuff/recoil.html' target='_blank'>here</a>.
I'm not sure where your standpoint is lying. As I remember the discussion started as wether or not you can get knocked off balance and fall when being shot. And not like you would fly through the air as described in the wikipedia. My standpoint is that you sure can lose your balance and fall over when being shot, but you won't fly through the air, I believe I stated that pretty clear in my first post of this discussion.
Anyhow: You're using the physical magnitudes in a way making it hard for me to follow your logic.
"Significantly less energy is actually imparted into the target. First of all, we can discount the recoil caused by the venting of gas. Secondly, significant amounts of energy are lost due to friction. By the time the projectile hits the target, you are looking at a "knockback" effect of about an inch, presuming that the target was the same weight as the firing system."
Define knockback effect. As I can see you mean it would be to put the machine gun to one's body and push it 1 inch? But let's not forget that there's impulse involved. Meaning you can push 1 inch slowly, or you can push the 1 inch fast and with great force.
"However, a man is roughly double the weight, so the force is halved. Additionally, in the case of a supersonic round above 5.56mm, the bullet generally travels through the target, retaining a significant proportion of its momentum."
I'm not sure, how can the mass of a man change the force of a projectile? And in my last post I did write that there was a larger chance for the projectile of a heavy weapon to pierce its target. I took for granted that you would know that I meant that less of the kinetic energy would be transffered to its target.
You're still forgetting my last line on my previous post, moment. You laying down firing something on a standing target and hit it on the head, if looking on the moment the target's will be much greater than yours.
GrendelAll that is fear...Join Date: 2002-07-19Member: 970Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, NS2 Playtester
edited March 2005
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I'm not sure, how can the mass of a man change the force of a projectile?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You're quite correct, it can't. What I was trying to convey was the fact that the mass of the target is double that of the mass of the launcher, so the <i>effect</i> of the force will be halved in terms of displacement of the target.
My point was that knockback is <b>negligible</b>. My physics isn't sufficiently fresh in my memory for someone not to pick holes in the language I use, but the argument can be answered by getting a rifle and an object of similar mass to a human, then shooting it.
If you fall over, it's because you've sustained a fatal wound, not because you've been physically pushed.
A bullet from a handgun wouldn't knock you over, other than if you collapsed in pain.
Say you were shot in the shoulder though. Your shoulder would definately be knocked back and your body would twist.
And anyway we would be shooting skulks and other aliens not marines <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo--> So it's kinda pointless arguing it!
A shotgun to the face would certainly send a skulk flying backwards. To a lerk it would probably send it flying but not as far if it's flying because of speed it is travelling, fade would probably just fall over backwards and an onos would just topple like it does now.
<!--QuoteBegin-Grendel+Mar 23 2005, 09:48 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Grendel @ Mar 23 2005, 09:48 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I'm not sure, how can the mass of a man change the force of a projectile?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You're quite correct, it can't. What I was trying to convey was the fact that the mass of the target is double that of the mass of the launcher, so the <i>effect</i> of the force will be halved in terms of displacement of the target.
My point was that knockback is <b>negligible</b>. My physics isn't sufficiently fresh in my memory for someone not to pick holes in the language I use, but the argument can be answered by getting a rifle and an object of similar mass to a human, then shooting it.
If you fall over, it's because you've sustained a fatal wound, not because you've been physically pushed. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Projectile Motion
E of the bullet before collision will equal E of the bullet + E of the person after the collision (in the same direction as before, vector quantity) (assuming no potential energy change)
Momentum before will equal momentum after (pos = pos or neg= neg depending on x direction in model)
F=MA the general Force = Mass times Acceleration equation...
A bullet will have a certain tiny little mass resulting in a quick deceleration and a fairly large force, however this force applied to a very massive person will result in little acceleration....
Why to do this? Bechause Hl is pure classic what needs to be remembered. Besides, it would be good if you can play all HL parts through with one quality -- like watching a movie.
there was an episode of mythbusters where they tested the "getting hit by bullets causes bodies to fly away from shooter" myth. they unloaded handgun, magnums, smgs, assaut rifles, and high powered sniper rounds into a pig carcass hanging by a hook. at the end their entire team unloaded everything at once. it turns out nearly all of the round's energy is used to penetrate the target, not knock it backwards. they only round that they used that actually caused any noticable backward movement was a slug from a shotgun. and yes, due to newton's third law (every action has a equal reaction) in order for a target to be knocked backwards by a round, the shooter would have to be also.
Comments
I hope the dev team looks into implimenting this. Not everyone can run HL2 that well, and this is a fine peice of eye candy to add.
I hope the dev team looks into implimenting this. Not everyone can run HL2 that well, and this is a fine peice of eye candy to add. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Newton's third law you mean? I don't know what you meant by knocking of their foot, but it's very possible for someone to fling backwards and totally lose their balance when they're shot. But it's not realistic that they would fly several meters as seen in action movies. At least not if they're shot with a handgun.
olololroks2damaXxX++
And if you used, say, an HMG and took the skulk out from an angle, I don't think it would just stop. It would pummle forward, wouldn't it? I mean, you arent't putting a lot of stopping force on it directly or anything.
I don't really care if this gets added to vanilla NS.
Theres ragdoll code already in the Hl1 SDK??
If you want ragdoll physics, Half-Life 1 isn't the game/engine you want. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
yeah, who needs innovation.
Theres ragdoll code already in the Hl1 SDK?? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, but its commented out, stating that it should be un commented when the bounding box issues are fixed. Physics libraries have little to do with rag dolls <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> from what i heard they coded in a physics engine seperate from valve's code<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thats cool, I tryed giving HL water more real life feel and only succeded in making it crash everytime I entered the water <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
There is more or less a physics engine in all games. In its simplest form it'll just be gravity sim.
I hope the dev team looks into implimenting this. Not everyone can run HL2 that well, and this is a fine peice of eye candy to add. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Newton's third law you mean? I don't know what you meant by knocking of their foot, but it's very possible for someone to fling backwards and totally lose their balance when they're shot. But it's not realistic that they would fly several meters as seen in action movies. At least not if they're shot with a handgun. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thats what I mean. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
F=MA owns you.
(Force=MassxAcceleration)
Do the math.
I remember watching the videos of the grunt picking up your grenade then throwing it back at you, or Barney walking up to a shotgun on the ground, then picking it up <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Theres ragdoll code already in the Hl1 SDK?? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Cool, rag dolls in a 6-year old game? Good thing they didn't include them, cause then it would be just plain hax.
F=MA owns you.
(Force=MassxAcceleration)
Do the math. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thanks. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
F=MA owns you.
(Force=MassxAcceleration)
Do the math. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Do the math of what? There are more than one thing that can decide wether or not you fall over from being shot. A machine gun's rounds are stronger than a handgun, but at the same time there's much larger chance that it would pierce its target rather than get stuck on the bone.
Also the shooter normally would carry the gun at shoulder level while shooting, creating a momentum that's smaller than the target if its hit on the head. This is if we put the rotation-center at one's feet.
<b>M</b>=<b>F</b>x|r|
The bolded are arrays, and the x is really cross-product and not multiplication.
The mass of a browning .50 cal is around 84 lbs, which is approximately half the weight of a human being. The distance the slide travels in recoil from this is only a couple of inches. This is due to both the effects of the bullet and the effects of the vented gas utilised in the propulsion.
Significantly less energy is actually imparted into the target. First of all, we can discount the recoil caused by the venting of gas. Secondly, significant amounts of energy are lost due to friction. By the time the projectile hits the target, you are looking at a "knockback" effect of about an inch, presuming that the target was the same weight as the firing system.
However, a man is roughly double the weight, so the force is halved. Additionally, in the case of a supersonic round above 5.56mm, the bullet generally travels through the target, retaining a significant proportion of its momentum. The net effect is that knockback is negligible. Ironically, more "knockback" occurs with weapons of a lower calibre, as more of their energy is imparted to the target. The nonsense of knockback can be demonstrated by watching pheasant shooting. They simply flutter to the ground, rather than fly backwards from the shot and they weigh only a few pounds.
Knockback occurs when you punch someone in the face, not when you shoot them. But don't take my word for it, try shooting some real guns. Or watch footage of a military firefight.
Or read through the explanations given <a href='http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics_of_firearms' target='_blank'>here</a> or <a href='http://www.bsharp.org/physics/stuff/recoil.html' target='_blank'>here</a>.
Anyhow:
You're using the physical magnitudes in a way making it hard for me to follow your logic.
"Significantly less energy is actually imparted into the target. First of all, we can discount the recoil caused by the venting of gas. Secondly, significant amounts of energy are lost due to friction. By the time the projectile hits the target, you are looking at a "knockback" effect of about an inch, presuming that the target was the same weight as the firing system."
Define knockback effect. As I can see you mean it would be to put the machine gun to one's body and push it 1 inch? But let's not forget that there's impulse involved. Meaning you can push 1 inch slowly, or you can push the 1 inch fast and with great force.
"However, a man is roughly double the weight, so the force is halved. Additionally, in the case of a supersonic round above 5.56mm, the bullet generally travels through the target, retaining a significant proportion of its momentum."
I'm not sure, how can the mass of a man change the force of a projectile? And in my last post I did write that there was a larger chance for the projectile of a heavy weapon to pierce its target. I took for granted that you would know that I meant that less of the kinetic energy would be transffered to its target.
You're still forgetting my last line on my previous post, moment. You laying down firing something on a standing target and hit it on the head, if looking on the moment the target's will be much greater than yours.
You're quite correct, it can't. What I was trying to convey was the fact that the mass of the target is double that of the mass of the launcher, so the <i>effect</i> of the force will be halved in terms of displacement of the target.
My point was that knockback is <b>negligible</b>. My physics isn't sufficiently fresh in my memory for someone not to pick holes in the language I use, but the argument can be answered by getting a rifle and an object of similar mass to a human, then shooting it.
If you fall over, it's because you've sustained a fatal wound, not because you've been physically pushed.
Say you were shot in the shoulder though. Your shoulder would definately be knocked back and your body would twist.
And anyway we would be shooting skulks and other aliens not marines <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo--> So it's kinda pointless arguing it!
A shotgun to the face would certainly send a skulk flying backwards. To a lerk it would probably send it flying but not as far if it's flying because of speed it is travelling, fade would probably just fall over backwards and an onos would just topple like it does now.
You're quite correct, it can't. What I was trying to convey was the fact that the mass of the target is double that of the mass of the launcher, so the <i>effect</i> of the force will be halved in terms of displacement of the target.
My point was that knockback is <b>negligible</b>. My physics isn't sufficiently fresh in my memory for someone not to pick holes in the language I use, but the argument can be answered by getting a rifle and an object of similar mass to a human, then shooting it.
If you fall over, it's because you've sustained a fatal wound, not because you've been physically pushed. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Projectile Motion
F=MA
VF^2=VI^2 +2*A*D
E=1/2MV^2
M1V1+M2V2=M1V1+M2V2 (basic momentum equation)
Basically all you need
E of the bullet before collision will equal E of the bullet + E of the person after the collision (in the same direction as before, vector quantity) (assuming no potential energy change)
Momentum before will equal momentum after (pos = pos or neg= neg depending on x direction in model)
F=MA the general Force = Mass times Acceleration equation...
A bullet will have a certain tiny little mass resulting in a quick deceleration and a fairly large force, however this force applied to a very massive person will result in little acceleration....
Meh thats all for now.. im bored
~Jason