Flatline Theories...

yes...if thats true, but you have no proof, nor does anyone haf proof that your wrong. as soon as you find some evidence that backspin allow you to maintain a velocity longer or decrease the rate of decelaration, then i will be all on your side. evidence provided in all of these posts suggest that one of the reasons (the only reason so far) that backspin makes the ball go further is because of lift and it canceling out with gravity.  this does not mean that its maintaining the velocity, it is still decelarating.  this is why balls shot from the flatline at longer distances tend to bounce off of you more often, because the velocity has decreased too much, if your theory is correct then there should be a break everytime at long distances.

and i still dont see why it matters if a ball hits harder or not, the ball usually breaks either way. im not saying that this is a pointless argument, im just sayin....ya

no, both of the balls have the same velocity and both are decelarating at the same rate, so at any given time the balls are traveling at the same velocity and therefor will hit the same. however, the flatline shoots further, so, at 250ft the flatline will hit harder than the normal barrel because the ball fromt he normal barrel will already be on the ground with no velocity and wont hit you at all.  because of the backspin, the ball travels further, and the only way that it would hit harder is if the backspin allows the ball to maintain a velocity for a longer period of time, or reduce the rate that it decelarates. and this hasnt been proven yet in this topic...i dont think.

Last weekend I actually started to rig up an experiment to try and make proof of something but my sprayer wasn't working right and I couldn't produce enough water mist mixed with the air to make the air flow visible.

The most valuable thing is that backspin creates lift which we all know is true so...

Wow. You guys need to go back and read this. It's pretty much the same statements repeated over and over again.

It is relatively easy to explain-

1. Distance- apparently everyone has accepted this, because it's true.

2. Ball hitting harder- I'm guessing this is the main arguement here? Hard to tell since every post is the same. Basically, this comment is too broad. What does "hitting harder" mean? Did the ball dry up and harden into a rock? Is it gaining speed? Does it break different?

Easy answer here- the ball is slowing down (decelerating) slower than a normal ball- so yes, it "feels" like it's hitting harder compared to a ball without backspin. BUT, at longer range here's the tricky part. Most players that have been playing a while know a ball that doesn't break hits harder and hurts more than one that does. Why? When it breaks, the paint and shell is shot off in different directions. The force of your skin pushing back has reached a point to push the ball into pieces. We'll give this a number- say it takes 10 "hit force" from your body to break a normal ball at normal speed (say 130 fps). If the ball slows down more than 130 fps, it would drop. However, the flatline keeps shots up in the air that shouldn't be up in the air. So, if a ball from the Flatline hits you at 95 fps, we'll say the ball won't break until 25 "hit force" from your body. Unfortunately, your body reaches only 20 "hit force" and doesn't break the ball, and sends it bouncing. 20 HF is twice as much as 10, so it hurt twice as much, thus making it seem it "hit harder."

Simple.

Where's KillerOne?

Monk wrote: Is 300fps fast enough to cause a spinning ball to decrease drag?

I don't think we know enough about the aerodynamic qualities of a paintball to know that.  We would also have to know the rotational speed.

And, of course, we have the further problem that velocity is constantly reducing - so even if 300fps is fast enough for spin to help, 200 fps might not be (which would be the velocity after a short while).

Ugh - complicated.  The flight calculator that UV posted is impressive, but I'm not man enough to know how accurate it is.

We definitely need some science.  If somebody develops a data set, I would be happy to crunch the numbers.  (I could also help with experimental design, I just don't have the wherewithall to perform the actual study).

Come to think of it, if we did a proper study with a good write-up, I bet we could get it published someplace...  (Most likely WARPIG, but hey - published is published)

im sorry but the flatline
OWNS

nuff said

Spinning will create lift, yes.  As to reducing drag, it depends on the velocity of the ball, the drag coefficient of the paintball, and the speed of rotation.

Rotation could either reduce or increase drag, depending on those variables.

You guys are just going to force me to dig out my old chronograph. Haven't used it in 12 years and we moved once since then. I will continue to search.