Dispatches from the Front  pg. 3

Using this ratio and solving for German training and action values with dispersion only I found that I could resolve the values.
So this is the result:
...............................my calculations……….................table
Range…......w /h……........Training/Action.……......Training/Action
1500m___0.563/0.484____ =98.6/72.4_________ >100%/72%
2000m___0.79/0.68______ =92.1/48.5__________>92%/49%

What is surprising is that it works. The ratio is the same all the way to 3000 meters.
A few things were discovered solving this.

1. Lateral dispersion is greater than vertical dispersion. The 128mm PaK 44 also has greater lateral dispersion than the vertical dispersion. Most German guns have the vertical deviation greater than horizontal deviation.
2. 'Extreme' dispersion apparently means 90% zone as opposed to the German 50% zone.
3. The 90% zone is 2.44 times the 50% zone. If yards are converted to meters this seems to work.
2.44 x 0.79m x 0.9144 = 1.76 ~ 1.75 yd.
Actually back in time someone made a math error. To convert meters to yards, meters have to be divided by .9144 not multiplied by that amount.

April 12, 2017
Gonzanga wasn't the winner, but they were in the finals and came in second. Villanova was upset early and didn't finish in the final 8.   I don't know if I'm going to change the program.  I could add a conference factor that might weigh the teams in a conference more or less.  I probably won't work on this until next season. 

March 15, 2017
Someone might ask why am I wasting my time with this March Madness Basketball stuff on a wargaming site. It's just an exercise in probability.   I'm using the Ballistic hit rectangular probability equations for something they weren't designed for. 
So the most probable tournament winner is Gonzanga.  Next is Villanova. So if these don't show up in the final four I might change the probability equations to the ellipse probability equations as they have less certainty above 50%.  So teams with lower rankings and worse records have a little better chance.

Also I'm working on a new program to feed sighting range estimation into the Ballistics program.   Up to now it has just been a guess of how good the range estimation a tank gun with a certain sight could achieve.  I'm trying to make a quantitative estimate based of telescope sight characteristics.  Like magnification x field of view x light transmission % as a factor.   Then this adjusted by training and ranging calibration and maybe something else.   It will produce a standard deviation of range error.  I'll post a page with different sight values when I am finished..

March 13, 2017
It is back!   March Madness Basketball Bracket Breaker program has been updated for the 2017 March Mad Basketball tournament. After a hiatus of 3 years I decided to play again.

January 17, 2017
I had to revise my Soviet gun dispersion page 34 when I found out that the 1951 US document I was basing my calculations on had mis-translated captured Russian firing table information.  It had translated Russian 'mean deviation' for 'median deviation'.   That may seem a small matter but they are not mathematically the same.   When the deviation is described as 'median deviation' it results in making the 50% probability of a hit ~18% less likely.   In effect making Russian guns less accurate.   Several pages have to be changed so it may take awhile to do.

December 22, 2016
A new page of a tongue-
in-cheek look at R&D military science in Star Wars.

October 14, 2016
A new page on some strange ballistic behavior  I found examining WWII Firing Tables.  I have no opinion as to whether or not they are in error or not.  It just requires more work to get my ballistic calculator to match the firing tables of these guns.  This is outside the equations of Robert McCoy who came up with the original programming of the ballistic program.  See page 52.

September 5, 2016
Since the Equivalent armor protection study may be a big deal I'm going to release my BHN Equivalent Armor Protection calculator.  See page 36.

September 2, 2016
A revelation. It looks like all US tables of captured German guns penetration and ballistics were done by the British.  The criteria and target armor specs changed in late war to coincide with US needs and maybe with US cooperation.   But tables once thought to originate at Aberdeen now appear to be copies of British Ordnance Board test data.  link

June 25, 2016
A new page on the German 50mm gun has been added.  Some problems I found in data   link

Jan 10, 2016
I updated Enigma 2 program to generate new Powerball number scheme  here. [zip]

December 15, 2015
My friend Joe (a contributor to Panzer War) has made his own set of rules that could be called Panzer War feather

weight.   Free PDF of Kampfgruppe rules here. [zip]

December 2, 2015
Updated page 48 with two graphs of 75mm/L70 KwK 42 ballistics.  I compare Aberdeen data to German data for this gun.  Though there are questions with both data sets this is the best comparison that can be done with available sources.

November 14, 2015
For awhile it looked like the  Germans normalized their gun penetrations. That is adjusting the numbers by multiplying by a ratio factor depending on armor hardness quality.  If the 75mm/L70 table data is compared to the 75mm penetration graph it seemed like the armor hardness was normalized to 243 BHN.  But, when the data for the 75mm KwK 40 was compared in the same way the data showed that no normalizing took place.  The armor was what it