If I hypothesised that hydraulic pressure of 1500psi would exert a force of 1500lbs on a 1in area ram and twice that for a 2in area ram, it would be a reasonable hypothesis.. Do you think what I have said makes sense as a hypothesis. Do you understand what I am trying to say, how would data help?
The workings and physics of hydraulic systems are extremely well documented and available in many textbooks. When you know the areas of the pistons, the distances they move and the pressures involved then the ARITHMETIC to prove the hypothesis is easy to display.
By contrast, you have just a hypothesis with no data to prove it - that is the prime weakness in your argument but you don't have the courage to admit it.
I think Brian has the conclusion spot on.
dCL has show how the use of real accuracy - measuring a physical distance in the background - uses actual data to put forward an assessment of the apache speed. You used no such data and claimed you are accurate because you looped the video and measured it 10 times - if what you are measuring isn't right then no matter how many times you do it, you will get the wrong answer.
You have previously dismissed this speed assessment as irrelevant to the argument - which it is - but you made such a big deal about how Nick's estimate was so wrong, in an attempt to discredit his criticism of your pet theory, that it has become the pivotal issue on your claims of accuracy and credibility.
You might have noticed a distinct lack of sympathetic or supportive posts in the last few pages - does that not tell you anything????