Get better at windcalls

[THLR]

Next episode. Sorry, this is not a very entertaining film and I'm going the long way in this season...
Very basic.

 

[bbell]

Great video. Thanks for sharing and keep up the good work!

 

[Jason Snyder]

Great video. Thank you.

 

[Dobermann]

Next episode. Sorry, this is not a very entertaining film and I'm going the long way in this season...
Very basic.

Thomas - we come to you for knowledge, not entertainment.

Although the product placement section for underwear that had you dancing around and shaking your butt with no warning remains as one of the funniest things I've personally seen on the internet ...

 

[THLR]

That one was to cringe my kids to death - " dad, my social life is over!" Great, more time available for chores...
Ep 370 is a bit more digestible, ep 371 should be more "allround relevant".

Just waiting for more winds...

 

[THLR]

Here's the next episode, more on the same basic themes

 

[West2East]

Here's the next episode, more on the same basic themes

Loved both of these videos.
Can you explain why you left your zero to the left (1-2cm) on your 100m target? I know you said "spindrift" and the shots where it's close enough to see that you are "off" it probably doesn't matter on animals or large targets. Is this just personal preference so that at the 600m and longer targets you're not having to include spindrift in your "wind hold"?

Thanks! and again, great content!

 

[ElPollo]

Thomas. Appreciate and enjoy your videos. Your low medium and high wind estimation seems pretty useful, but how specific do you think your wind reads are to your environment?

Where I live and hunt, wind speed this morning are currently at 18-36 miles per hour and trees are a rarity. My take is that estimating wind speeds from vegetation gets harder when all you have is grass and when you are at the higher end of the spectrum. Estimating speed from mirage is also tougher at higher speeds because basically everything is completely horizontal. I tend to use my wind meter multiple times per day just to keep track of the peaks and lulls and make adjustments at the shot based on how the wind feels relative to recent checks. I still use vegetation for direction, but most of the category systems based on movement (e.g. the Beaufort scale) aren’t precise enough for shooting in my world.

Also, I noticed your reference to “half the hundreds” for a drop calculation. Which is pretty similar to the quick drop system that Form refers to. Have you to listened to his recent Form Friday podcasts on that? Do you see any significant differences between what would are doing for windage and elevation from what he is using?

 

[THLR]

They are not specific to my environment, as I've applied them on several continents.
You can extrapolate from lower windobservations, but then you have to know what the Hellmann Coefficient is (a formula for "friction" in the terrain) or apply "firefighter's math". Both which would be wildly inconvenient methods compared to raising a Kestrel. The mentioned Beaufort scale is in my opinion rubbish for a shooter.

Visual observation is best limited to velocities not higher than 10 mph. Beyond that you start having so much whipping - vibration - boiling as well as mechanical turbulence over terrain features which will give you false readings.

My opinion is that you should get your windcall down to 2mph error or less. More than that and you run out of range/ error budget pretty fast. My opinion is that you should be familiar with your error budget and the shoot/no shoot decision should be a gauging of budget against available target surface.

Under the conditions you subscribe, I certainly cannot do that without a Kestrel. I have headshot at 400-450'ish under similar conditions (the shot needed taking to fix someone elses problem), but that was with high Bc bullet (g1 up towards 0,8?) AND the wind observation was held against earlier Kestrel measurements. So it was a comparison of two pictures and not an actual windobservation taken "off the terrain". It was "this looks the same as the last spot which measured 9 msec (18'ish mph)". Even so, it was a lucky shot. I would not have been able to detect an 8 or 11 or even react to a gust (which is a sudden increase 5 msec or more)

...just in case ther's been a misunderstanding, "half the hundreds" is windage, not drop/elevation if that was the reference. It is in essense the same as the mph gun system, it's just a convenient way to arrange the numbers. Allthough the unit names and process might have variations, the physics behind remains the same. If the efficiency is there, no protests from my side - it's easy to develop a "cultural affinity" for certain units of measurements (for example naming the wind knots, mph, msec or kmh - they all do the same thing under different names). So I doubt there would be much difference between us as understand both of us to be oriented towards killing. I suspect Form is a bit more updated as I essentially stopped evolving sometime around 2010-12, and I've also stepped "back and down" since my 2021 haircut. Limited time and resources, so I focus on an even smaller skillset.

Do you have a link to the podcast? Searching Form Friday on Spotify gave me the episode "who killed Jesus". I have an inkling there's little shooting involved in that podcast...

Was this helpful or perhaps just a wall of text?

Edit:
And just to be clear: I have nothing against Kestrels.
I'm just trying to keep the material threshold (and monetary investment) lower for a beginning shooter.
If you understand basic wind and pick up a Kestrel, you have a gain.
If you never learnt basic wind and just take a number of a Kestrel, you have a handicap and a training error.

I suspect that when the reality of field shooting kicks in, many will find the simple methods to be "sufficient for effective range" until getting into position is mastered. Recognizing and getting TO a position where you can take the shot is THE prerequisite for a good shot. Why juggle gear? Your eyes should be on target, your head should be on the environment and you should be "present" enough to understand what is happening right now.

 

[THLR]

Loved both of these videos.
Can you explain why you left your zero to the left (1-2cm) on your 100m target? I know you said "spindrift" and the shots where it's close enough to see that you are "off" it probably doesn't matter on animals or large targets. Is this just personal preference so that at the 600m and longer targets you're not having to include spindrift in your "wind hold"?

Thanks! and again, great content!

Yes you deducted correctly.
It is my personal preference.

I'd rather take have the error where it's small enough to be irrelevant and have a more "neutral" windhold meaning rather than forget the correction and have that be the difference between a marginal lung shot and a burst diaphrame with poo salsa pushed into the meat.

I doubt it is important enough to really matter.

 

[aschuler]

I don't have anything to add the conversation I just wanted to say thanks for all the videos you've produced over the years. It has been a wonderful source of information and inspiration. Please keep it up!

 

[West2East]

Yes you deducted correctly.
It is my personal preference.

I'd rather take have the error where it's small enough to be irrelevant and have a more "neutral" windhold meaning rather than forget the correction and have that be the difference between a marginal lung shot and a burst diaphrame with poo salsa pushed into the meat.

I doubt it is important enough to really matter.

Thanks!
Thought I'd mention that watching your videos has become a "family affair" with my two young daughters( 2 and 4yr old) Haha. They ask for the hunting video where the guy shoots on an island I also had to start out by telling them you probably lived close to Anna and Elsa(Disney Princesses).
Gotta start them young!

 

[ElPollo]

They are not specific to my environment, as I've applied them on several continents.
You can extrapolate from lower windobservations, but then you have to know what the Hellmann Coefficient is (a formula for "friction" in the terrain) or apply "firefighter's math". Both which would be wildly inconvenient methods compared to raising a Kestrel. The mentioned Beaufort scale is in my opinion rubbish for a shooter.

Visual observation is best limited to velocities not higher than 10 mph. Beyond that you start having so much whipping - vibration - boiling as well as mechanical turbulence over terrain features which will give you false readings.

My opinion is that you should get your windcall down to 2mph error or less. More than that and you run out of range/ error budget pretty fast. My opinion is that you should be familiar with your error budget and the shoot/no shoot decision should be a gauging of budget against available target surface.

Under the conditions you subscribe, I certainly cannot do that without a Kestrel. I have headshot at 400-450'ish under similar conditions (the shot needed taking to fix someone elses problem), but that was with high Bc bullet (g1 up towards 0,8?) AND the wind observation was held against earlier Kestrel measurements. So it was a comparison of two pictures and not an actual windobservation taken "off the terrain". It was "this looks the same as the last spot which measured 9 msec (18'ish mph)". Even so, it was a lucky shot. I would not have been able to detect an 8 or 11 or even react to a gust (which is a sudden increase 5 msec or more)

...just in case ther's been a misunderstanding, "half the hundreds" is windage, not drop/elevation if that was the reference. It is in essense the same as the mph gun system, it's just a convenient way to arrange the numbers. Allthough the unit names and process might have variations, the physics behind remains the same. If the efficiency is there, no protests from my side - it's easy to develop a "cultural affinity" for certain units of measurements (for example naming the wind knots, mph, msec or kmh - they all do the same thing under different names). So I doubt there would be much difference between us as understand both of us to be oriented towards killing. I suspect Form is a bit more updated as I essentially stopped evolving sometime around 2010-12, and I've also stepped "back and down" since my 2021 haircut. Limited time and resources, so I focus on an even smaller skillset.

Do you have a link to the podcast? Searching Form Friday on Spotify gave me the episode "who killed Jesus". I have an inkling there's little shooting involved in that podcast...

Was this helpful or perhaps just a wall of text?

Edit:
And just to be clear: I have nothing against Kestrels.
I'm just trying to keep the material threshold (and monetary investment) lower for a beginning shooter.
If you understand basic wind and pick up a Kestrel, you have a gain.
If you never learnt basic wind and just take a number of a Kestrel, you have a handicap and a training error.

I suspect that when the reality of field shooting kicks in, many will find the simple methods to be "sufficient for effective range" until getting into position is mastered. Recognizing and getting TO a position where you can take the shot is THE prerequisite for a good shot. Why juggle gear? Your eyes should be on target, your head should be on the environment and you should be "present" enough to understand what is happening right now.

Totally agree on visual observation under 10 mph and on trying not to get too gear focused. As for the cultural anffinities, I’m a Mil guy because tenths are easier than quarters. But wind speeds in meters per second and metric barometric pressure just makes my brain hurt. I’ve started using the Quick Drop approach that Form recommends over the last year or two and like it a lot. His Form Fridays are part of the Shoot2Hunt podcast that is on their website, Apple Podcasts, YouTube and others. Here are a couple that are pertinent to quick drop and wind brackets.

As far as wind goes, I’m always working on improving my sub 10 mph wind calls. But like I said, a lot of what I deal with is beyond that am I just can’t make those calls by feel. I have to use a wind meter for the higher speeds, and I’m keeping a running tab on that with multiple checks per day and whenever I notice a wind change. I’m generally trying to record low and high speeds, but I’m trying to time shots to avoid gusts. If I have topographic situations where the wind changes between me and the target, I’m using vegetation movement to identify that more often than mirage. And it’s just a visual comparison. Does it appear to be more or less than what I’m seeing close to me compared to my wind meter results, and how does the direction change? The best case for that is where you are in a sheltered spot and are really dealing with one wind speed and direction for the majority of the shot or of you have two wind conditions that are opposite.

Honestly though, if I’ve got winds over 20 mph or significantly different wind speeds and directions in a single shot in a hunting situation, I am looking to get closer or get the wind behind or in front of me. I will recognize my limitations and avoid tempting the fates.

 

[THLR]

I also had to start out by telling them you probably lived close to Anna and Elsa(Disney Princesses).
Gotta start them young!

I haven't seen Anna lately, but Elsa is still in the neighbourhood. She usually drops by for the season's greetings. Haven't seen her that much recent years though, she's a grown woman now and have to prioritize differently

 

[THLR]

Have you to listened to his recent Form Friday podcasts on that? Do you see any significant differences between what would are doing for windage and elevation from what he is using?

I have listened now, seems to be no significant differences really. Vocabulary/ choice of names more than anything.

What I call "dead rifles" is covered in the rifle setup podcast, only point I'd add is also to consider the trigger housing. An "open" trigger (interior exposed) like Jewell can be a nightmare in snow (and likely dust), whereas a "closed" trigger (interior capsuled) like Triggertech just seems to be a better idea.
MOA vs MILS isn't really a discussion here; if you are not using MILS you are doing it wrong and there are no MOA users that needs converting.
Ballistic solutions for the field, we both organize the numbers for speed and simplicity. The trajectory table screenshot/screensaver was clever; I try not to bring a cellphone simply because I don't want to be available (in recent years, com requirement has forced me). I have perhaps reduced trajctory data from full DA capacity down to a window of 30° C degrees and 3000m altitude variation and I have it all right on the rifle vs a trajectory card but both methods has the same resolution so it's more how preferences has evolved.

His numbers on accuracy fits very well with what I've seen and my own performance, if you do the math on my targets I reckon you end up with the same numbers.

 

[ElPollo]

I have listened now, seems to be no significant differences really. Vocabulary/ choice of names more than anything.

What I call "dead rifles" is covered in the rifle setup podcast, only point I'd add is also to consider the trigger housing. An "open" trigger (interior exposed) like Jewell can be a nightmare in snow (and likely dust), whereas a "closed" trigger (interior capsuled) like Triggertech just seems to be a better idea.
MOA vs MILS isn't really a discussion here; if you are not using MILS you are doing it wrong and there are no MOA users that needs converting.
Ballistic solutions for the field, we both organize the numbers for speed and simplicity. The trajectory table screenshot/screensaver was clever; I try not to bring a cellphone simply because I don't want to be available (in recent years, com requirement has forced me). I have perhaps reduced trajctory data from full DA capacity down to a window of 30° C degrees and 3000m altitude variation and I have it all right on the rifle vs a trajectory card but both methods has the same resolution so it's more how preferences has evolved.

His numbers on accuracy fits very well with what I've seen and my own performance, if you do the math on my targets I reckon you end up with the same numbers.

I appreciate your responses. It’s always nice to get a little cross pollination on ideas.

I hope you take this as a compliment and in no way a slight towards what Form does either. One of the things I enjoy the most about your videos is that you show that being a competent rifleman a process and that you aren’t infallible. Form’s list of reasons why we miss starts with “we suck at shooting”. We practice at shooting and wind calling to address that reality, and we refine our equipment to address the other factors on the list. But it’s refreshing to watch someone prove they are actually human on YouTube, and it helps the rest of us temper our expectations for ourselves. I also really appreciate the humor you bring to the subject. I think you’d be a person who I would enjoy a day in the field with, and would learn a ton from.

 

[Macintosh]

@THLR thanks, this is great—both the video and the responses on this page. Theres a lot there and plenty of good insights to tease out of it. I really, really appreciate seeing the two approaches to wind side by side. Thank you.

Also, “poo salsa”.

 

[THLR]

Thanks. Very human with all the flaws included. Right now inordinately frustrated with my shipping brokerage agent that seems to have pocketed my money without actually shipping the pronghorn trophy. Impossible to get any sort of contact after the initial phonecall, straight to voicemail...

Attached a picture for those of you wanting a hardcopy/backup rangecard.
Read vertical to desired range, read horisontal and apply relevant corrections.

This was what I used around 2007-8. I think it was published around 2010? Before that I had a slightly different setup that coaxed the shooter even more step-by-step, perhaps 2005-6???

The core principle was the same as today, know your calibration and make weather corrections from that. Back then ballistic solvers were very primitive and not something you could really bring. Laser and Kestrel/Silva/Brunton was the only practical/reliable electronic tools.
These days I have everything right on the rifle turret, but filling out one of these forms can be a good exercise in understanding /getting a better feel for the quantity of trajectory change your relevant weather will impose.

I'm not sure what the new Leica AB lasers do, but seeing how my Leica laser applies cosinus to range (puts shot low), how my AB app solutions put the shots low at range until ballistic calibration is applied(despite Cd and Magnetospeed V0), how my Swarovski EL Range not once gave me a correct comeup etc etc...

I believe is prudent to have some sort of significant backup to the trajectory data.

I suspect Gunwerks Revic binos/rangefinders work better as it is their primary business to deliver a shooting solution. From what little shooting I've done with their systems, the impacts have been spot on. For the European manufacturers the volume of buyers need range but not trajectory, so the flaws aren't really exposed/discussed on forums.

 

[Macintosh]

@THLR , so on that sheet the standard-condition ballistic solution is in column B “clicks”, and every other column is an adjustment from that value? Ie clicks=32 or 3.2mil, and each of the factors listed in subsequent colmns would be +.1 or -.1, etc?

Is this intended to be a ballistic training exercise of cataloging actual dopes, or is this a reference you use(d) “in the moment”?

 

[THLR]

Correct.
Click/mrad/moa or whatever you want to call it --> whatever you click your scope.

Spin drift: Correction to windage

1 click moves meters: A useful number to dial odd ranges

Grey column right is killing window. How many meters can your target move closer/farther without you needing to change anything. Combined with a prelasered aim low/aim high line in the terrain, it makes for quick kills.

Both. When you grow familiar with your trajectory, you will not need to consult a trajectory table or computed firing solution.