Some remarks on projectile motion with a linear

resistance force
C. A. Morales1,2 , J. H. Muñoz1 , C. E. Vera1
October 6, 2022

Abstract
We revisit the projectile motion assuming a retarding force proportional to the
velocity, F⃗r = kmV ⃗ . We investigate the effect of the parameter k on the radial
distance of the projectile and the highest point of the trajectory. We show that the
radial distance oscillates from a certain launch angle, find an expression for the
critical angle associated to this oscillation, and show that the set of highest points
does not describe an ellipse.

1 Introduction
The projectile motion in a constant gravitational field is an important topic that is stud-
ied in introductory physics courses at university level. It is considered in absence of
air resistance in almost all fundamental physics textbooks (see for example references
[1, 2, 3, 4]). In order to consider a more realistic situation, it is necessary to include
retarding forces (Fr ). A good approximation, in this case, is to assume that they are
proportional to some power of the speed (Fr ∝ v n ) [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10].

In this paper we revisit the motion of a projectile in the air considering the effect of a
retarding force proportional to the velocity (n = 1): F⃗r = mk V ⃗ = mk(ẋ bi + ẏ bj),
where ẋ = dx/dt, ẏ = dy/dt, m is the mass of the projectile and k is a positive con-
stant that specifies the strenght of the resisting force. The unit of k is s−1 . The linear
drag model, F⃗r ∼ V ⃗ , is a good approximation when the dimensionless Reynolds num-
ber is small, indicating that the inertia forces are negligible with respect to the viscous
forces and the fluid has a laminar flow. Under these conditions, the Stokes’ law is valid
for a sphere of radio R moving in the air [11, 12, 13].

The projectile motion with linear resistance force has been extensively discussed in
the literature a long time ago using different approaches to obtain, in an approxi-
mate way or by means of a computational tool, the trajectory of the particle, the
time of flight, the maximum height, the range, the curve of safety or the path length
([5, 6, 7, 8, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27]). In the last two
decades, the interest in this problem has increased because it has been demonstrated
that the projectile motion with a retarding force proportional to the velocity is a good

1
scenario to apply the Lambert W function since it is necessary to solve transcendental
equations in this problem. In this direction, several authors have obtained analytical ex-
pressions for the range, the angle that gives the maximum range (or the optimal launch
angle), the time of flight, the time of ascent, the time of fall, the maximum height, the
locus of the apexes (in Cartesian and polar coordinates) in terms of the Lambert W
function [28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44].

Motivated by the results showed in Ref. [45] for a projectile motion without air resis-
tance (k = 0), we investigate the effect of the parameter k on the radial distance of
the projectile motion with a retarding force proportional to the velocity and find that
the radial distance oscillates from a critical launch angle and obtain a condition for this
angle which also depends of the parameter k. Thus, our work is a normal extension of
this paper. According to our knowledge, this result has not been previously reported.
In addition, from the results reported in Refs. [33, 36] we display in a simple and di-
dactic procedure, using Mathematica as in Ref. [19], that the locus formed by the set
of maxima of the trajectories of the particle is not an ellipse.

The paper is organized as follows. In section 1...

2 General results
Let us assume that in t = 0 the projectile is launched from the origin of the coordinate
system with the initial velocity V⃗0 and the angle of elevation θ. The equations of motion
in the horizontal and vertical directions, respectively, are
mẍ = −mk ẋ (1)
mÿ = −mk ẏ − mg, (2)
where g is the acceleration of gravity. The solutions for these equations are well known
[5, 7, 8, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 23, 24, 25, 27]
U
1 − e−kt


x(t) = (3)
k
gt kV + g
1 − e−kt ,


y(t) = − + 2
(4)
k k
where U = V0 cos θ and V = V0 sin θ. Figures 1 and 2 show the variation of the
horizontal and vertical positions of the projectile in function of time, respectively, for
different values of the parameter k and the launch angle, taking V0 = 10 m/s and
g = 9.81 m/s2 .

The horizontal and vertical components of the velocity are

ẋ = U e−kt (5)

g kV + g −kt
ẏ = − + e , (6)
k k

2
 4 k=0.5
k=1
3 k=2
k=3

x(m)
2

0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
t(s)
7

6 θ=15 °

θ=30 °
5
θ=45 °
4
θ=60 °
x(m)

0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
t(s)

Figure 1: Left. Horizontal position of the projectile in function of time with θ = 60◦ and several
values of the parameter k . Right. Horizontal position of the projectile in function of time with
k = 1 s−1 and different values of the launch angle.

and the components of the acceleration are given by

ẍ = −kU e−kt (7)

ÿ = −(kV + g)e−kt . (8)

The trajectory in the plane x − ẋ is obtained from the expressions (3) and (5) for x(t)
and ẋ(t), respectively. It is:
ẋ = U − kx. (9)
This trajectory corresponds to a straight line. Its slope is the resistance coefficient k. In
a similar way, the trajectory in the plane y − ẏ is obtained from the equations (4) and
(6) for y(t) and ẏ(t), respectively, giving
 
g k  g
Ln ẏ + − ẏ = ky − V. (10)
k kV + g k

Figure 3 shows the trajectories given by equations (9) and (10) taking V0 = 10 m/s,
g = 9.81 m/s2 , θ = 60◦ and k = 2 s−1 . It was obtained using Mathematica by means
of the instructions ParametricPlot[{x[t], x’[t]}, {t, 0, 1.27}] and ParametricPlot[{y[t],

3
 3.0

2.5

2.0

y(m)
1.5

k=0.5
1.0
k=1
0.5 k=2

0.0 k=3

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2

t(s)

0
y(m)

θ=15 °
-1
θ=30 °

-2 θ=45 °

θ=60 °
-3

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2

t(s)

Figure 2: Left. Vertical position of the projectile in function of time with θ = 60◦ and several
values of the parameter k . Right. Vertical position of the proyectile in function of time with
k = 1 s−1 and different values of the launch angle.

y’[t]}, {t, 0, 1.27}].

Now we are going to get the time required for the projectile to arrive at the maximum
height. Taking ẏ = 0 in equation (6) it is obtained that the projectile reaches the peak
at the time  
1 kV + g
tpeak = Ln . (11)
k g
The maximum height (Ym ) and the horizontal position corresponding to this height
(Xm ) are obtained substituting Eq. (11) in y(t) and x(t), respectively:
 
g kV V
Ym = − 2 Ln 1 + + (12)
k g k
 −1
UV kV
Xm = 1+ . (13)
g g
The point (Xm , Ym ) gives the apex of the trajectory.

4
 5
8

4 6

4
3
x'(m/s)

y'(m/s)
2

1
-2

0 -4

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 0.00.51.01.5

x(m) y(m)

Figure 3: Trajectories of the system in the planes x − ẋ (left) and y − ẏ (right) with k = 2 s−1
and θ = 60◦ .

Now let us get the trajectory of the projectile. To do this, we obtain the time t from the
equation x = x(t):
 −1
1 k
t = Ln 1 − x , (14)
k U
and substitute it in y = y(t):
 
g k kV + g
y= Ln 1 − x + x. (15)
k2 U kU

Figure 4 shows the trajectory of the projectile considering g = 9.81 m/s2 , V0 = 10

m/s, θ = 60◦ and k = (0.5, 1, 2, 3) s−1 . Another way to obtain this figure is by
means of the Mathematica package with the instruction: ParametricPlot[{x[t], y[t]},
{t, 0, tf }], where tf is the final time. This procedure is useful when the expression
y = y(x) is not explicitly known.

The range R is obtained making y = 0 in equation (15). Doing that, it is obtained

V + kg
 
g k
2
Ln 1 − R + R = 0. (16)
k U U
Now, we are going to analyze the effect of the parameter k on kinetic, potential and
total energies. Figure 5 shows the kinetic energy T = 12 m(ẋ2 + ẏ 2 ) in function of time

5
 3

y(m)
0

k=0.5
-1
k=1
-2 k=2
k=3
-3
0 1 2 3 4 5
x(m)

Figure 4: Trajectory of the projectile taking V0 = 10 m/s, θ = 60◦ and k = 0.5 s−1
(blue), k = 1 s−1 (orange), k = 2 s−1 (green) and k = 3 s−1 (magenta).

taking m = 1 kg. It has a minimum value when the projectile reaches the maximum
height because in this point the vertical component of the velocity vanishes (ẏ(t) = 0).
When the time is bigger than the time for reaching the maximum height (t ≫ tpeak ),
the kinetic energy becomes constant because ẋ → 0 and ẏ → g/k, where g/k is the
terminal velocity. Figure 6 displays the potential energy U = mgy in function of time.
This graph is similar to that of y = y(t). Figure 7 shows the total energy E = T + U
of the particle in function of time. For t large compared with tpeak , this energy is dom-
inated for potential energy since kinetic energy turns out constant. Finally, Figure 8
exhibits the rate of energy-loss (dE/dt) in function of time. It is, approximately, the
constant −mg 2 /k for t ≫ tpeak .

6
 50

40 k=0.5
k=1
30
T(J)
k=2
k=3
20

10

0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
t(s)

Figure 5: Kinetic energy of the projectile with V0 = 10 m/s, θ = 60◦ and k = 0.5 s−1
(blue), k = 1 s−1 (orange), k = 2 s−1 (green) and k = 3 s−1 (magenta).

30
k=0.5
25 k=1

20 k=2
k=3
15
U(J)

10

-5
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
t(s)

Figure 6: Potential energy of the projectile with V0 = 10 m/s, θ = 60◦ and k = 0.5 s−1
(blue), k = 1 s−1 (orange), k = 2 s−1 (green) and k = 3 s−1 (magenta).

7
 50 k=0.5
k=1
40 k=2
k=3
30
E(J)

20

10

0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
t(s)

Figure 7: Total energy of the projectile with V0 = 10 m/s, θ = 60◦ and k = 0.5 s−1
(blue), k = 1 s−1 (orange), k = 2 s−1 (green) and k = 3 s−1 (magenta).

- 20
dE/dt (J/s)

- 40 k=0.5
k=1
- 60 k=2
k=3

- 80
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
t(s)

Figure 8: Rate of energy loss of the projectile with V0 = 10 m/s, θ = 60◦ and k =
0.5 s−1 (blue), k = 1 s−1 (orange), k = 2 s−1 (green) and k = 3 s−1 (magenta).

Finally, we are going to obtain, in an approximate way, the expressions for tpeak , Ym ,
z2 z3
Xm and the trajectory. Using the expansions Ln(1+z) = z− + −... in equations
2 3
(11), (12) and (15), and (1 + z)−1 = 1 − z + z 2 − ... in equation (13), it is obtained

8
 "    2 #
V0 sinθ 1 kV 1 kV
tpeak = 1− + − ... (17)
g 2 g 3 g
V02 sin2 θ
   
2 kV
Ym = 1− + ... (18)
2g 3 g
" 2 #
V02 sin2θ

kV kV
Xm = 1− + − ... (19)
2g g g
g gk
y = (tanθ)x − x2 − x3 + ..., (20)
2V02 cos2 θ 3V03 cos3 θ

where we have assumed that the dimensionless perturbative parameter kV g is small.

Taking k = 0 in the above equations, it is obtained the well-known expressions for the
projectile motion in absence of air resistance.

2.1 The time of flight (Tf )

The required time for the projectile to return to the ground is obtained taking y = 0 in
y(t) (see Eq. (3)). Making this, it is obtained
kV + g
1 − e−kTf = 0.


gTf − (21)
k
Using the expansion ez = 1 + x + x2 /2 + . . . and considering only terms through k 2
in the last equation, the time of flight is, approximately,
2V 2V 2V
Tf ≈ = = (1 + kV /g)−1 ,
kV + g g(1 + kV /g) g

2V
Tf ≈ (1 − kV /g). (22)
g
This result is a good approximation only for very small values de k. If k = 0, it is
obtained the well-known expression for the time flight in the ideal case.

Another way to analyze the equation (21) is re-write it as

kV + g
1 − e−kTf ↔ h(Tf ) = f (Tf ).


gTf = (23)
k
The left-hand side of the last equation is a linear function whereas the right-hand side
is a transcendental expression. Therefore, it is not possible to get an analytic expres-
sion for Tf by means of an easy and simple mathematical procedure. One approach
to obtain an approximate solution to the last equation is using numerical methods as
Runge-Kutta, Newton-Raphson, Euler integration or the bisection, for example. These
methods are studied in a course of numerical methods in an undergraduate program of
physics or mathematics. On the other hand, as we mentioned in the introduction, it is

9
possible to find analytical solutions for the time of flight in terms of the Lambert W
function which is available in Maple and Mathematica as LambertW and ProductLog
commands, respectively.

Considering that the procedure to obtain an analytical expression for the time of flight
in terms of the Lambert W function is difficult, abstract and cumbersome for those stu-
dents of careers other than physics or mathematics, or have not taken a course of special
functions, we use the well-known command Plot in Mathematica, without employing
the Lambert W function, in order to illustrate the behaviour of the time of flight. We
obtain numerical values for the flight time getting the coordinates of the intersection
point where h(Tf ) = g(Tf ), for several values of the retarding force parameter k (in
units of s−1 ) assuming that the launch angle is fixed.

Figure 9 shows the graphics of the left-hand and right-hand sides of the equation (23)
with k = 1 s−1 and θ = 60◦ . In this case, we can see that the solution is given by
Tf = 1.43405 s. And in Table I, we display the flight time for different values of k,
taking the launch angle θ = 60◦ , 65◦ , g = 9.81 m/s2 and V0 = 10 m/s .

Figure 9: The linear h(t) (black line) and the transcendental f (t) (red line) expressions
as a function of t, given by Eq. (23), with k = 1 s−1 and θ = 60◦ .

3 Behavior of the radial distance (r) and the critical

angle (θc )
The radial distance from the origin of thepcoordinate system to the projectile can be
p as a function of time (r =
expressed x(t)2 + y(t)2 ) or the horizontal distance
(r = x2 + y(x)2 ). Some years ago, Walker [45] reported an interesting phenomenon

10
 k (s−1 ) Tf (s)
2 1.27478 (1.1197)
1 1.43405 (1.32283)
0.5 1.56384 (1.56384)
0.1 1.71651 (1.7941)
0.08 1.72589 (1.80433)
0.04 1.74529 (1.82551)
0.02 1.75533 (1.83648)
0.01 1.76043 (1.84207)
0.005 1.76301 (1.84489)

Table 1: The time of flight for several values of k with θ = 60◦ (65◦ ).

in the projectile motion in absence of a friction force. He found that projectiles are
"coming and going" for launch angles greater than 70.5288◦ . From this critical angle,
the radial distance exhibits an oscillation: it increases, decreases and increase again.
Recently, Ribeiro and Sousa [46] generalized the Walker’s work and demonstrated that
the "coming and going" phenomenon is also present in the projectile motion with a
linear resistance force. Motivated by the previous works of Walker [45] and Ribeiro-
Sousa [46] we have scrutinized this fascinating result about the oscillation of the radial
distance.

Figures 10 and 11 show r as a function of t and x, respectively, for several values of

the launch angle (θ = 65◦ , 63◦ , 61◦ , 59◦ , 57◦ ), k = 0.5 s−1 and V0 = 10 m/s. We
have taken the time in the interval 0 ≤ t ≤ Tf for each trajectory. It is an important
fact at the moment of doing the graphics.

It is observed that the radial distance exhibits a particle behavior for launch angles big-
ger than 61◦ , approximately. It increases, decreases and increases again, i.e., there is
a radial oscillation. This phenomenon is better seen in the graph of r in function of x
(Figure 11). The critical angle depends on the product of the parameter k and the initial
speed.

Now we are going to obtain, in an approximate way, an expression for the launch
critical angle, θc , from which the radial oscillation is manifested. We begin by requiring
that the radial velocity be zero:

dr x(t)ẋ(t) + y(t)ẏ(t)
= p = 0. (24)
dt x2 (t) + y 2 (t)
(kt)2 (kt)3
Assuming that kt ≤ 1, we use the expansion e−kt ≈ 1 − kt + − and
2 6
substitute it in the expression x(t)ẋ(t) + y(t)ẏ(t) = 0. Thus, we obtain the condition

(7k 2 V02 + 10kV g + 3g 2 )t2 − 9(kV02 + V g)t + 6V02 = 0. (25)

11
Figure 10: Radial distance in function of time with k = 0.5 s−1 , V0 = 10 m/s,
g = 9, 81 m/s2 and θ = 57◦ (green line), θ = 59◦ (yellow line), θ = 61◦ (purple
line), θ = 63◦ (red line), θ = 65◦ (black line).

Solving for t yields

p
9(kV02 + V g) ± 81(kV02 + V g)2 − 24V02 (7k 2 V02 + 10kV g + 3g 2 )
t= ; (26)
2(7k 2 V02 + 10kV g + 3g 2 )

as the quantity inside the square root is equal to zero, it is obtained

27g 2 sin2 θc − 26kgV0 sin θc − (29k 2 V02 + 24g 2 ) = 0. (27)

Solving the last equation for sin θc , it is obtained
r
13 2 238 2
sin θc = Γ± Γ + 18, (28)
27 9 9
where the dimensionless parameter Γ is defined by Γ ≡ kVg 0 . The solution with sign
minus gives negative angles. So, we take the solution con sign plus and obtain the
expression for the critical angle in function of the air resistance coefficient k:
r !
13 2 238
θc (k) = sin−1 Γ+ Γ2 + 18 . (29)
27 9 9

This expression is only valid por small values of k. Let us mention that for k = 0 it is
obtained θc ≈ 70.53. So, this result agrees with the value obtained in Ref. [45] with-
out the linear resistance force. However, our result is different from the one reported
in the equation (9) of [46]. Figure 12 displays the critical angle for small values of the
parameter k.

12
Figure 11: Radial distance in function of horizontal position with k = 0.5 s−1 , V0 =
10 m/s, g = 9, 81 m/s2 and θ = 57◦ (green line), θ = 59◦ (yellow line), θ = 61◦
(purple line), θ = 63◦ (red line), θ = 65◦ (black line).

4 Evolution of the apexes

When the air resistance is not considered (k = 0), the locus conformed by the set of
points corresponding to the maximum height, (Ym (θ), Xm (θ)), where Ym = (V0 sin θ)2 /2g
and Xm = (V02 sin 2θ)/g, describes an ellipse in function of the launch angle (see, for
example, Refs. [24, 45, 47, 48, 49]). If the retarding force is considered, i.e., k ̸= 0,
it is natural to extend the same analysis to this type of motion and pose the following
question: what is the locus that describes the maxima of all projectile trajectories in
function of the launch angle?

Stewart [33] and Hernandez [36] demonstrated by means of the Lambert W function in
cartesian form and polar coordinates, respectively, that the locus of the set of maxima
of the projectile motion in a linear resisting medium is not an ellipse. The procedure
to obtain an explicit analytical expression y = y(x) for the locus of the apexes is not
easy or trivial in terms of the Lambert W function. It is rather something tedious and
cumbersome. For that reason, we have revisited it and obtained this locus in cartesian
coordinates, in an easier way, without using the Lambert W function.

For the purpose of obtaining an expression for the locus of the set of maxima in carte-

13
 84

82

80

θ c (°) 78

76

74

72

70
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10
-1
k(s )

Figure 12: Behavior of the critical angle in function of k with kV0 /g ≪ 1

sian coordinates without using the Lambert function, it is necessary to obtain Ymax in
function of Xmax from equations (12) and (13). For that, we obtain sin θ in function
of Xmax from equation (13) giving the following expression
 2 2  2 2 2
Xm k 2gkXm Xm g
sin4 θ + 2 − 1 sin2
θ + 3 sin θ + 4 = 0. (30)
V0 V0 V0
The two physical solutions of this quartic equation are given by
s !
1 √ 4gkXm 2
sin θ1 = E − −6A − E − 3 √ (31)
2 V0 E
s !
1 √ 4gkXm 2
sin θ2 = E + −6A − E − 3 √ , (32)
2 V0 E
where

k 2 Xm2
− V02
A= , (33)
3V02

B 1  p 1/3
E = −2A + 2
√
1/3 + 3(21/3 )V 4 C + D + C , (34)
3 C+ D + C2 0

with
B = 21/3 V04 − 2k 2 Xm
2
V02 + 12g 2 Xm
2
+ k 4 Xm
4


, (35)

3
C = 108g 2 k 2 Xm
4
V06 − 72g 2 Xm
2
V06 k 2 Xm
2
− V02 + 2V06 k 2 Xm
2
− V02 ,


(36)

14

3
D = −4 12g 2 Xm
2
V04 + V04 (k 2 Xm
2
− V02 )2 . (37)
After, we replace the expressions for sin θ1 and sin θ2 in equation (12). Thus, we ob-
tain in cartesian coordinates the trajectory of the set of maxima of the projectile motion,
Ymax (Xmax ). Figure 13 displays this trajectory for different values of the parameter
k showing that the trajectory of the peak is not an ellipse when the retarding force
F⃗r = kmV ⃗ is included. The upper part of each graph is obtained replacing sin θ1 in
Ymax , while the lower part of each graph is obtained using sin θ2 in Ymax . We high-
light that these trajectories are obtained without the Lambert function.

3
Y max (m)

-4 -2 0 2 4
X max (m)

Figure 13: Trajectory of the highest point of the projectile for k = 0.0001 s−1 (blue),
k = 0.5 s−1 (red), k = 1 s−1 (green), k = 2 s−1 (purple), k = 3 s−1 (orange), and
k = 4 s−1 (black).

5 Summary
In this article we revisited the projectile motion considering a retarding force propor-
tional to the velocity, F⃗r = kmV ⃗ , where the parameter k gives the strength of the
force. We extended the analysis performed in Ref. [45] in which it was assumed that
the air resistance is negligible (k = 0). We found that the radial distance of the projec-
tile under the influence of a linear retarding force also oscillates from a critical launch
angle and derived a condition for this angle which depends on the parameter k too. Ac-
cording to our literature review, these results have not yet been published. Moreover,
we display in a simple and didactic approach with the help of Mathematica, without
using the Lambert W function, the time of flight and the evolution of apexes of the tra-
jectories, in function of k and the launch angle. Our results extend the basic knowledge
of the parabolic motion assuming a retarding force proportional to the velocity and can
be included in introductory physics courses at university level.

15
References
[1] Serway R A and Jewet J W 2004 Physics for Scientists and Engineers 6th edn
(Belmont: Thomson Brooks/Cole)
[2] Halliday D, Resnick R and Walker J 2010 Fundamentals of physics (New Jersey:
Jhon Wiley and Sons)
[3] Tipler P A and Mosca G 2008 Physics for Scientists and Engineers 6th edn (New
York: W. H. Freeman)
[4] Young H D and Freedman R A 2008 Sear’s and Zemansky’s University Physics:
With Modern Physics 12th edn (Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley)
[5] Thornton S T and Marion J B 2003 Classical dynamics of particles and systems
5th edn (Belmont: Thomson Brooks/Cole).
[6] Symon K R 1971 Mechanics 3rd edn (Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publish-
ing Company)
[7] Murphy R V 1972 Maximum range problems in a resisting medium The Mathe-
matical Gazette 56 10
[8] de Mestre N 1990 The Mathematics of Projectiles in Sport (Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University Press)
[9] de Lange O L and Pierrus J 2010 Solved Problems in Classical Mechanics (New
York: Oxford University Press)
[10] Price R H and Romano J D 1998 Aim high and go far—Optimal projectile launch
angles greater than 45° Am. J. Phys. 66, 109
[11] Vennard J K 1940 Elementary fluid mechanics (New York: John Wiley and Sons,
Inc).
[12] Batchelor G K 1967 An Introduction to Fluid Dynamics (London: Cambridge
University Press).
[13] Long L N and Weiss H 1999 The velocity dependence of aerodynamic drag: a
primer for mathematicians Am. Math. Monthly, 106(2), 127
[14] Greiner W 2003 Klassische Mechanik I (Frankfurt am Main: Verlag Harri
Deutsch)
[15] Erlichson H 1983 Maximum projectile range with drag and lift, with particular
application to golf Am. J. Phys. 51(4), 357
[16] Martin P and Puerta J 1991 Two-point fractional approximants for the motion of
a projectile in a resisting medium Eur. J. Phys. 12 86.
[17] Groetsch C W 1996 Tartaglia’s inverse problem in a resistive medium Am. Math.
Monthly 103(7) 546

16
[18] Groetsch C W and Cipra B 1997 Halley’s comment - Projectiles with linear resis-
tance Mathematics Magazine 70(4) 273
[19] de Alwis T 2000 Projectile motion with Mathematica Int. J. Math. Educ. Sci.
Technol. 31 749

[20] Bruno A D S and Matos J M O 2002 The projectile path lenght (in Portuguese)
Rev. Bras. Ens. Fis. 24(1) 30
[21] Sarafian, H 2021 What Projective Angle Makes the Arc-Length of the Trajectory
in a Resistive Media Maximum? A Reverse Engineering Approach American
Journal of Computational Mathematics 11, 71-82

[22] Groetsch C W 2003 Timing is everything: The French connection Am. Math.
Monthly 110 950
[23] Groetsch C W 2005 Another broken symmetry Coll. Math. J. 36(2) 109
[24] Fowles G R and Cassiday G L 2005 Analytical Mechanics, 7th edn (Belmont:
Thomson Brooks/Cole)
[25] Pereira L R and Bonfim V 2008 Security regions in projectile motion (in Por-
tuguese) Rev. Bras. Ens. Fis. 30(3) 3313
[26] Borgui R 2013 Trajectory of a body in a resistant medium: an elementary deriva-
tion Eur. J. Phys. 34 359.

[27] Grigore I, Miron C and Barna E S 2017 Exploring excel spreadsheets to simulate
the projectile motion in the gravitational field Romanian Reports in Physics 69(1)
[28] Warburton R D H and Wang J 2004 Analysis of asymptotic projectile motion with
air resistance using the Lambert W function Am. J. Phys. 72 1404.

[29] Packel E W and Yuen D S 2004 Projectile motion with resistance and the Lambert
function Coll. Math. J. 35 337.
[30] Stewart S M 2005 Linear resisted projectile motion and the Lambert W function
Am. J. Phys. 73 199

[31] Stewart S M 2005 A little introductory and intermediate physics with the Lambert
W function Proc. 16th Biennial Congress of the Australian Institute of Physics vol
2 ed M Colla (Parkville: Australian Institute of Physics) pp 194–7
[32] Morales D A 2005 Exact expressions for the range and the optimal angle of a
projectile with linear drag Can. J. Phys. 83 67

[33] Stewart S M 2006 An analytic approach to projectile motion in a linear resisting

medium Int. J. Math. Educ. Sci. Technol. 37:4 411
[34] Kantrowitz R and Neumann M M 2008 Optimal angles for launching projectiles:
Langrange Vs. CAS Canad. Appl. Math. Quart., 16(3), 279

17
[35] Karkantzakos P A 2009 Time of flight and range of the motion of a projectile in
a constant gravitational field under the influence of a retarding force proportional
to the velocity J. Eng. Sci. Tech. Rev. 2 (1) 76.
[36] Hernandez-Saldana H 2010 On the locus formed by the maximum heights of
projectile motion with air resistance Eur. J. Phys. 31 1319.

[37] Stewart S M 2011 Comment on ’On the locus formed by the maximum heights
of projectile motion with air resistance’ Eur. J. Phys. 32 L7
[38] Hernandez-Saldana H 2011 Reply to ’Comment on "On the locus formed by the
maximum heights of projectile motion with air resistance"’ Eur. J. Phys. 32 L11

[39] Stewart S M 2011 Some remarks on the time of flight and range of a projectile in
a linear resisting medium J. Eng. Sci. Technol. Rev. 4 (1) 32
[40] Morales D A 2011 A generalization on projectile motion with linear resistance
Can. J. Phys. 89 1233

[41] Stewart S M 2012 On the trajectories of projectiles depicted in early ballistic

woodcuts Eur. J. Phys. 33 149
[42] Hu H, Zhao Y P, Guo Y J and Zheng M Y 2012 Analysis of linear resisted pro-
jectile motion using the Lambert W function Acta Mech. 223 441.
[43] Bernardo R C, Esguerra J P, Vallejos J D and Canda J J 2015 Wind-influenced
projectile motion Eur. J. Phys. 36 025016.
[44] Morales D A 2016 Relationships between the optimum parameters of four pro-
jectile motions Acta Mech. 227 1593.
[45] Walker J S 1995 Projectiles: Are they coming or going? Phys. Teach. 33 282

[46] Ribeiro W J M and de Sousa J R 2021 Projectile Motion: The ”Coming and
Going” Phenomenon Phys. Teach. 59 168
[47] Fernández-Chapou J L, Salas-Brito A L and Vargas C A 2004 An elliptic property
of parabolic trajectories Am. J. Phys. 72 1109

[48] Thomas G B, Weir M B, Hass J and Giordano F R 2004 Calculus 11th edn, p. 930
(Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley)
[49] Soares V, Tort A C and de Oliveira Goncalves A G 2013 A note on the parabolic
motion: Unexpected circle and ellipse Rev. Bras. Ens. Fis. 35 2701
[50] Pispinis D 2019 Calculation of minimum speed of projectiles under linear re-
sistance using the geometry of the velocity space European Journal of Physics
Education 10 (3) 1-9

18