As an engineer myself, responsible for writing detailed, descriptive, and defensible governance documents, I greatly appreciate the diligence some folks have put into the information shared here. I have similar documents and case studies both from which I have learned, and of which I authored as guides for others. The disadvantage, naturally, is that “we can’t program people.” These mathematical models and rules of thumb are fantastic tools, but we can’t program people. Reading through these, I’ve seen shooters develop one of two negative inferences:
1) The reader can’t understand all of this mathematical jargon, so they get turned off and don’t attempt something well within their capabilities.
or
2) The reader does understand the content, but then unfortunately believes knowledge can displace experience, and becomes imbued with a sense of false confidence. While these tools will readily analyze real-world results for meaningful decision making, “garbage in, garbage out” remains to apply. If a shooter assumes a level of precision they can’t actually deliver - but believe they can - a rough road awaits when decisions are made based on bad input data.
The short version, go shoot, and go hunt. Marrying the two together isn’t so difficult.