i asked google a short question. "can a dopplar radar 'chronograph' reading be used to calculate the trajectory of a bullet?"
you get a lot of hit from the usual suspects, ... , berger bullets, sierra bullets, and hornady, ... , all of who are making healthy money on advertising long sleek bullets with high ballistic coefficients for use in hunting, target shooting and quite likely by the military for sniping purposes. all of pictures of these bullets, and all have "ballistic coefficients" attached to the pictures.
now, they tell you how various factors can impact measurement and calculation of velocity and ballistic coefficient figures. things like temperature, altitude (and atmospheric pressure), humidity and whether near-by crows and ravens have feathers up their rears. it's all very learned, and based on scientific stuff, and recitation about how the military uses this kind of equipment for shooting artillery shells w/ utmost accuracy.
but, when it comes to telling you how the various ballistic coefficient figures were calculated for a specific bullet, ... , they tell you absolutely nothing about how the bullet's flight was measured, nor anything about the conditions that prevailed that day for temperature, humidity, atmospheric pressure (literally how thick and heavy the stuff is that the bullet traveled through), nor the altitude and locale of where the shooting took place. nor do they tell you if the bullet were polished, nor the age and condition, chambering and condition of the bore from which the bullet was fired.
does all that make a difference? damn straight it does, but they don't tell you.
so, the short answer to the question posed is "nope." you, my friends, take the information on faith. can you trust, completely, the accuracy of answers from people who make their money on how you receive information from them ... nope, you cannot.
can you trust the trajectory charts they generate? nope, you cannot. (not in any absolute sense, but they will help you hit a fresh piece of target backing about 6' by 8' if your lucky.)
so, what's to be done?
it's simple. you take "old tilly," your trust old shooting iron, and you load your ammunition as capably and accurately as you can, and you go out and you shoot your loads on various days, and you get an indication of how it shoots at reasonable ranges, and how group sizes are impacted by such things as distance from the rifling to the bullet tip (you do that by measuring the overall length of the bullet, tip to base, and compare that to the distance to the rifling that you've determined.)
then you take the rifle and bullet combination (e.g., the "load") you've selected, and take it to your range, and you fire the who mess at various increasing ranges, out to the distance you want to shoot, and you compile your own ballistics table and note what you had to do with your scope settings and such to get there. and, you write it all down. and, shoot it again, just to make sure.
sounds expensive (especially if you are shooting these super duper bullets, some of which comes individually wrapped in fine papers & such, in plastic boxes with a hole for each bullet), and time consuming, doesn't it. well, it is.
very.
and, is it repeatable every day, no matter what? nope, not even close. and, are you repeatable every day? nope, not even close. some days you eat the bear, and some days the bear eats you.
and, i will tell you a little secret, that the bullet people don't tell you. you know how in the movies the sniper guy licks his thumb, holds it into the wind, and then looks at the cross hairs pasted right on top of the bad guys nose, and blasts a hole right between his eyes at 1,200 yards or so? well, it doesn't always happen that way, and actually, seldom does. these guys, these snipers, the best shots in the world, often miss the first couple times that they shoot at these bad guys ... they depend on spotters who are watching through very high power scopes, and who note such things as bullet strikes and where sand or dirt is kicked up around the poor dumb bastard they are executing. sometimes it takes them 3 or 4 shots until they hit someone. (and, sometimes, the idiot in question figures he's being shot at, and he hides behind something solid for as long as he has to.)
so, you may take it with a grain of salt when you read some claims about bullet performance and performance parameters such as velocity and ballistic coefficient and the like, and just take it for a fact that oft times when you pay a couple bucks (or more) for a bullet, it comes with a little oil from the snake to make it go down the barrel better.
now, for hunting, i use an older rifle i've had for 30 years, and i shoot nosler 175 grain 7mm partitions (semi-spitzers are my favorites) mostly because they perform dependably if i do happen to hit what i am shooting at. i've hit some critters, and i've missed some critters, mostly because the nut behind the end of the stock was out of whack.
i never hit a damned thing with a chart, nor with advertising copy. and, i'll tell you something else ... at one time, i spent a lot to time and effort trying to get reasonably competent with a .308 winchester at a pretty good distance. i got reasonably competent at a certain distance, and i tried to stretch it another 100 yards or so. and, i just couldn't. there comes a time in every bullet's flight, where it just seeks the ground with amazing rapidity, and it goes to ground faster than it is going farther.***
they don't tell you that in the ballistic's charts, nor in the advertising copy. no matter how hard they try to create that impression, the damned things just aren't laser beams. they just become chicken legs falling off the end of the table at christmas dinner.
john jay @ 09.30.2021
*** in all my days of hunting elk, i never got to shoot off a concrete bench with bench rests pads and rests that dial in adjustments, and the longest shot i ever made was sitting in about 3 feet of snow across a small tree truck that had been bent double parallel to the ground from a previous year's snow load. i just laid the rifle across the trunk, held on the elk, and shot, and down he went. skill? some, i suppose. luck, a certain amount, for sure. how to apportion the shot between luck and skill? your guess is a good as mine. all i know is that it wasn't the elk's lucky day.