What a segue, Ken, and thanks for the answer. I read the article when I joined the Campfire and your book years ago - maybe not well enough. I do use your method to anneal the cases for my wildcats and it works quite cleanly. Without it, I would have lost a lot of investment in Rigby cases over the years.
As for the QL family, that's made my life a lot easier since the suite allows me to be more accurate in my designs. I actually bought QL and QD because LFAD will not let you experiment off their suggested powder choices. But I do run the QL numbers back into LFAD and compare the results (wishing there was a transfer program between them). There are some differences in the results between the two programs but with experience, I believe one can use this information to advantage.
Since I have been involved with computer systems since the 1960's, commercial ballistics software was never desirable for me as I just entered the ballistics formulae into a program to execute without calculation. I guess graduating from a slide rule directly to a mainframe helped in this; I never had to wear out my fingers on calculators. I remember when LFAD was sold in another format back in the 80s or so and I did not think it worth the money at the time. However, it has been vastly improved over the years, at least on the GUI side. As for accuracy, it is acceptable.
I find QL much more detailed and, of course, one can enter almost any aspect of case and cartridge design necessary. There are many variables available for any degree of granulation one might wish to pursue.
