I hate to be a wet blanket but viruses are also a concern. Could some scumbag implant something then the next guy that opens it get zapped?
Got the email. Thanks.
Another option is to password protect it and limit access to members.
I guess its possible that a member would add a virus.
Other ideas? Are we willing to risk it ?
Other Ideas --
The surest would be to institute a sticky thread with two spread sheets updated periodically as the first post.
- The first would be for those where the sheetmaster would place AR-Friendly, meaning loads with max pressures less than 50ksi.
- The second would be for Bolt-Guns only with the absolute maximum pressure for a postable load being the 63ksi listed in Ramshot and Accurate Arms load manuals for the 6mm PPC. This would also be the sheet where loads with longer than AR magazine-length COALs would go.
The second post should be a template showing minimum acceptable data and "nice to have" information. This would help both the posters and the sheetmaster.
Members post their new/favorite loads the way we normally do now.
The OP or agreed-on sheetmaster would have the responsibility for checking the reasonableness of posted loads and whether it should be classed as an "AR-Friendly" or "Bolt-Only" load. Only then would he or she update the master sheet and upload to the first or second post as an edit.
After thinking about this - I think the way to control it would be to have only one or two "sheet masters" who have passwords to the spreadsheet to have access to edit. They would then post a PDF version for all members to access for info.
Members would send their info directly or post to the sheet master(s).
Would this work?
Good ideas guys. Access to a Skicky by forum members to a non-editable PDF file that would be maintained by a forum member(sheet master) sounds good.
Could one of the administer weigh in here or are we barking up the wrong tree?
Here is a link to the first page of data Whelenon sent me - hunting bullets sorted by weight and then by BC: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/34132774/Gre...0Selection.pdf
Is this the type of output the members are looking for?
While there are multiple lists of bullet lengths already available on the web, it would be very convenient if they could be worked in with the database you are starting.
The other is how you plan to create space for bullets where the manufacturer is kind enough to publish velocity-dependent BC's, e. g. Sierra.
Keep up the good work!
Pretty cool. The Hornady 129 IB, SP, and SST are listed as "139gr" though. Change that to 129gr.
There's also the Swift 130gr Scirrocco that should be included, with a .571 G1 BC.