Quote from: mman on June 27, 2014, 09:20:58 AMQuote from: 375CT on June 27, 2014, 08:36:48 AM
Makes sense, but how to be sure? I get and agree to the point you made, but making no sense, well, that's the hard part out of this, because we are not dealing with any way to test the actual implementation.
Litz speaks about standard deviations when he mentions distribution factors. This alone tells us that probability distribution can't be flat. Another proof is that litz's tool gives approx. same results as mine. And mine is based on normal distributions.Quote from: 375CT on June 27, 2014, 08:36:48 AMNo, I'm only recommending CEP for group size measuring. For wez tool you can use monte carlo or CEP depending which properties you value. I decided to go with CEP because for me it was more important to compare different calibers, bullets and conditions than get absolutely accurate results in hitting probability. Problem with monte carlo is that you get slightly different results for every calculation. That's not desirable if you try to compare something.
I understand you are recomending going CEP for a more realistic simulation, am I right on my assumption?
In practise you can never accurately calculate hitting probability anyway. That's simply because you don't know exact standard daviations for distribution factors. WEZ tool is always at it's best for comparing not for absolute probabilities.
Quote from: 375CT on June 27, 2014, 08:36:48 AM
Makes sense, but how to be sure? I get and agree to the point you made, but making no sense, well, that's the hard part out of this, because we are not dealing with any way to test the actual implementation.
Quote from: 375CT on June 27, 2014, 08:36:48 AMNo, I'm only recommending CEP for group size measuring. For wez tool you can use monte carlo or CEP depending which properties you value. I decided to go with CEP because for me it was more important to compare different calibers, bullets and conditions than get absolutely accurate results in hitting probability. Problem with monte carlo is that you get slightly different results for every calculation. That's not desirable if you try to compare something.
I understand you are recomending going CEP for a more realistic simulation, am I right on my assumption?
Quote from: mman on June 27, 2014, 06:20:11 AMQuote from: 375CT on June 26, 2014, 11:44:10 PMThat's easy one. It must be normal distribution. No sense to use flat distribution, that would lead to strange results.
Well, so far the original questions remains, is Litz's WEZ (a term taken from Air Combat for budget error analysis) flat or not?![]()
Quote from: 375CT on June 26, 2014, 11:44:10 PMThat's easy one. It must be normal distribution. No sense to use flat distribution, that would lead to strange results.
Well, so far the original questions remains, is Litz's WEZ (a term taken from Air Combat for budget error analysis) flat or not?![]()