|
Anyone got a good write up on why the bow and arrow is so ubiquitous in pretty much every culture?
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 12:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 20:34 |
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:How far away was wireless battlefield radio technology? It was there from the start of WWI but the equipment was quite bulky and communication was limited to spark gap transmitters* using Morse. It's a bit difficult to answer your question as even modern radio leaves a lot to be desired and there have been gradual improvement since it's introduction. The technology at the time was in it's infancy and "wireless battlefield radio technology", if you're thinking of "voice communication on specific frequencies", was still years away. WWI accelerated the research into transmitter vacuum tube transmitters but they didn't see much use until post-war. Wireless In The Trenches Morse is what I like to think of as something of a musical language: you don't have time to count the dits and dahs so you have to learn the rhythm of the letters, nor do you have time to think about what each rhythmic group corresponds to which letter.** It takes a couple of months of intense training to get a soldier up to speed which is a pretty hefty investment and seriously limits the number of operators you have available in trenches. Those same men are needed by the Navy for use on ships, at headquarters or command posts, etc. It's not too hard to understand why you'd want to keep a hard to replace soldier further from harm and rely on trench phones for the last few hundred yards if you can. Antennas, which by necessity must be above the trench, make for good targets as do the operators. quote:As the aerials have to be erected over the trenches, the poles being stuck on the parapet, they were naturally attractive targets. quote:The [headquarters type] station was erected, the apparatus installed. This consisted of a motor lorry set, 1½ K. W., 120-foot steel mast, an umbrella aerial, with a complement of three operators. It stood for just two hours. Then over came one of those huge 5.9 shells, and the lorry set, the steel mast, the umbrella aerial and the three operators were all shot sky-high. I presume they have since then come down again. *Spark Gap Transmitters: Basically making GBS threads static over the entire radio spectrum. Whoever is loudest "wins." See: sinking of the Titanic. They are illegal to operate these days and have been since the late 20's. Laboratory spark gap transmitter example mp3, 3 dits, followed by a key down of 7, 120, 800 sparks a second. There's no background noise that'd occur in a real example in this sample. **You really have to learn to "think in Morse", at speed, to use it. The "feel" of the rhythm at low speeds (5words per minute) and high speeds (25wpm) is completely different. Learning at low speed gives you time to think about what each group of dits and dahs represents which is a hard habit to break once you try and improve your speed. I practice receiving using the Koch method which sends the dits and dahs at high speed (so the brain learns the high speed rhythms) but leaves gaps between the characters that are the length of the gaps that'd normally be sent if you were transmitting at a slower speed. code:
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 12:38
|
|
|
I don't have much insight to offer about this, but it is a fairly interesting little article, if you're interested in modern naval combat (trigger warning: contains math and bad flow charts) http://www.weaponsanalysis.com/docs/SalvoModel.pdf Now, I have a question for anyone who can answer it: how are such apparently simple and rigid formulas actually implemented into real world doctrine? I would assume that, at least today, these formulas are used mostly for computer simulations and from there, war gaming. Now obviously current models and doctrines are much harder to find information about, and the particular type of engagement the article describes has only happened a handful of times in the post-war era. I'm looking for something like a completely described chain from mathematical formula to real world, active usage. The most prominent historical example in my mind are the actual formulas the Germans used in WW1 to calculate the exact number of trains and troops that could be moved along major infrastructure lines. I'd go nuts if I could find them online and pour over them. Edit: Though even that is quite a bit different than mathematical formulas dealing with fluid situations in combat. Edit the 2nd: Ah wargaming grognards, I knew I could count on you for a bit more information. http://giantbattlingrobots.blogspot.com/2010/07/lanchesters-laws-and-attrition-modeling.html It does seem that most mathematical combat modelling I can find only offers a broad rule of thumb for doctrinal usage, since they are so simple. This is bordering on turning into a math question (my favorite kind  ), but are there any more complex formulas out there that describe things more accurately, or is this about as good as it gets?
Cumshot in the Dark fucked around with this message at 13:11 on Nov 27, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 12:58
|
|
|
Alan Smithee posted:Anyone got a good write up on why the bow and arrow is so ubiquitous in pretty much every culture? Paleolithic missile technologies such as slings, spear throwers or bow and arrow are ubiquitous because they're truly ancient, economically viable even in the direst of conditions and highly effective both in hunting (incl. fishing) and warfare, giving a noticeable edge over a mere javelin or thrown rock. Early technologies related to survival spread like a wildfire so you only needed one guy fiddle with the basic premise and soon everyone on this planet would be acquainted with it. Except Australians. My theory is that northern Australians were under no threat of invasion across the Strait of Torres so there was no pressure to try to adopt a technology that wasn't a particularly great improvement over spear throwers in hunting and actually looked more like a child's toy. Snobs. Bow and arrow also has the temporal benefit over other missile weapons in that while you can only improve a sling to a certain point, there's no theoretical limits to how much potential energy the bow can store. In this regard the bow is much like muskets, a simple basic design that offers unlimited improvability.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 15:44
|
|
|
It is relatively easy to make a selfbow. With metal tools and experience, you can do that in just one afternoon. There's an article in the bowyer's bible where a guy demonstrates how to make a bow with flintstones and such, which takes more time, but it's still no magic at all. You can bring down the largest game with a bow between 50-70#, so there are also lots of choices in terms of wood that you can use. You also have many choices for your string. Rawhide, gut, ramie, linen, etc. I's really a very simple weapon that gives you the advantage to reach out and kill stuff pretty efficiently. Btw, it takes longer to make a good set of arrows than a bow.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 16:39
|
|
|
Koramei posted:How on earth do you find those pictures so quickly, Rodrigo Diaz? I'm hopeless at delving for examples. But yeah, I didn't say that to disagree with you on the underarm/overarm thing (not that I know enough about it to disagree), I just wanted to talk about the art- and it is something I want people to keep in mind, especially when it's essentially ancient pop art. I know you weren't disagreeing with me I was mainly doing it for my own edification. I find pictures really fast because there's a few key resources to look at. The horribly named and super web-2000 website https://www.medievaltymes.com has all the Morgan (or Maciejowski) Bible plates, and https://www.thearma.org has a bunch of fechtbuchs. The Wallhausen plate I have from forever ago. I just save interesting things as I go along. https://wga.hu is also good for the odd look, and museum websites can be handy. Rodrigo Diaz fucked around with this message at 22:22 on Nov 28, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 16:52
|
|
|
It's not that hard to make a decent arrow, the hardest part is making many arrows that all fly the same. I don't shoot at very large distances, but at even 20 meters you start noticing slightly heavier arrows flying differently than slightly lighter ones.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 17:21
|
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:It's not that hard to make a decent arrow, the hardest part is making many arrows that all fly the same. I don't exactly understand what you mean. I'm sure you can glue some feathers on a piece of cane and put a tip of some kind on it, but that doesn't make it a decent arrow. What you can do today with a fletching tool and modern glue is trivial. You buy straightened shafts, always spined and sometimes even weigthed to groups, but they don't grow like that. Easy to work material like cane takes alot of work to get them straigth, same with wood. You need to weight them, cook your glue, glue the feathers properly by hand or with a simple tool. Yesterday I sat for like 3 hours and stripped feathers from the keel. That was just 30 feathers. We're still lacking an arrowhead. So, how about flint, maybe bronze, iron or steel? Atm I'm glueing some goose feathers to a set of ottoman target arrows and I can tell you, this isn't a job for the faint hearted. And I'm using modern glue. Weigth and fletching is the hard part. And then you go and shoot the arrow and lose it. Or it breaks.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 17:44
|
|
|
As a concept, an arrow is just a miniature throwing spear (which is literally a stick with a sharp bit on the end). It isn't therefore that difficult to see that almost any group which makes a spear and has the relevant materials to hand will eventually start making bows and arrows because someone in that group is going to come up with the idea.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 18:02
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:As a concept, an arrow is just a miniature throwing spear (which is literally a stick with a sharp bit on the end). To add to this, arrows from Papua New Guinea and (i think) some parts of the Amazon don't even have fletching.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 18:16
|
|
|
If you want your arrow to go where you think you're aiming, instead of off to right/left, your arrows have to be "spined". Basically they have to flex correctly with the bow.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 18:22
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:As a concept, an arrow is just a miniature throwing spear (which is literally a stick with a sharp bit on the end). Except that isn't what happened. Bows are not obvious at all, and it is entirely possible they were only invented once on earth, subsequently spreading everywhere else through diffusion. Arrow points are unknown in the Americas until 2000 years ago, and probably spread to the continent over the Bering strait from Eurasia. Places like Australia which were very isolated from most of the human population just never figured it out.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 19:15
|
|
|
a travelling HEGEL posted:No, there are people who believe this. Rodrigo Diaz, post The Bad Photograph.   Squalid posted:Bows are not obvious at all, and it is entirely possible they were only invented once on earth, subsequently spreading everywhere else through diffusion. , this is not documented at all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 19:29
|
|
|
Squalid posted:Except that isn't what happened. Bows are not obvious at all, and it is entirely possible they were only invented once on earth, subsequently spreading everywhere else through diffusion. Arrow points are unknown in the Americas until 2000 years ago, and probably spread to the continent over the Bering strait from Eurasia. Places like Australia which were very isolated from most of the human population just never figured it out. Clovis points? Aren't those more ~10000 years old?
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 19:33
|
|
|
Squalid posted:Except that isn't what happened. Bows are not obvious at all, and it is entirely possible they were only invented once on earth, subsequently spreading everywhere else through diffusion. Arrow points are unknown in the Americas until 2000 years ago, and probably spread to the continent over the Bering strait from Eurasia. Places like Australia which were very isolated from most of the human population just never figured it out. Any bored gradeschooler with a rubber band can rig up a simple bow and arrow using their fingers and a pencil. I think just about any place with stretchy animal tendons available could come up with the bow and arrow, it's possible that Austraiian aborigines didn't have the right materials for good bows so they used the boomerang and woomera instead.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 19:38
|
|
|
Squalid posted:Except that isn't what happened. Bows are not obvious at all, and it is entirely possible they were only invented once on earth, subsequently spreading everywhere else through diffusion. Arrow points are unknown in the Americas until 2000 years ago, and probably spread to the continent over the Bering strait from Eurasia. Places like Australia which were very isolated from most of the human population just never figured it out. What? Why would people who live on the other side of the loving Bering Strait be less isolated than Australians? There is no evidence for a singular invention and diffusion, what ever would give you that idea? edit: a travelling HEGEL posted:He didn't post it, but he told me where I could find it. Now with video from the world's smallest pike block https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1t_4g5f04PA quote:Speaking of Of course it isn't we're talking prehistoric 
Rodrigo Diaz fucked around with this message at 19:53 on Nov 27, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 19:45
|
|
|
Rodrigo Diaz posted:Now with video from the world's smallest pike block If I were their Gefreyter I'd have shot myself.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 19:55
|
|
|
a travelling HEGEL posted:He didn't post it, but he told me where I could find it. I have no clue what's happening. I assume that both sides should be using their pikes' pointy ends instead of shoving each other like a bunch of rugby players?
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 19:56
|
|
|
I'm embarrassed for everyone in this video.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 19:58
|
|
|
Bacarruda posted:I have no clue what's happening. I assume that both sides should be using their pikes' pointy ends instead of shoving each other like a bunch of rugby players? Jabbing each other with pointy sticks is generally frowned upon by health and safety inspectors.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 20:00
|
|
|
Squalid posted:Places like Australia which were very isolated from most of the human population just never figured it out. They weren't that isolated, in that there was some exchange with New Guineans. Who did have bow and arrows. It could be that the people who were in contact just didn't think it was of use to them. AATREK CURES KIDS posted:Any bored gradeschooler with a rubber band can rig up a simple bow and arrow using their fingers and a pencil. I think just about any place with stretchy animal tendons available could come up with the bow and arrow It's different trying to achieve something that you already know will work than by chance stumbling upon a concept and then making it kill things. Presumably everyone here knows how to make fire with some sticks and it's a really simple concept, but it becomes a lot harder if nobody ever showed or explained it to you. Including telling you that you can make fire all by yourself. But enough about that, it's impossible to tell and it's not pertinent to the thread. Nenonen fucked around with this message at 20:08 on Nov 27, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 20:04
|
|
|
Bacarruda posted:I have no clue what's happening. I assume that both sides should be using their pikes' pointy ends instead of shoving each other like a bunch of rugby players? Yep. The first and last time this comes down to physical strength (and it is a taxing job) is when you heft that bitch and balance it. The rest is about thinking and skill.
Edit: closing up is good if you've got flintlocks or anything later, because it packs more lead into a smaller space. But it's bad if you've got a matchlock because it's dangerous, and it's bad if you have a pike because you need a lot of room to move. HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 20:46 on Nov 27, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 20:12
|
|
|
I understand that you don't want to actually kill people, but what's the point of re-enacting a pike push when you're not going to use your weapons at all. Give them big foam pike heads or something. a travelling HEGEL posted:[*]With a lot of leeway between people, you can actually "fence" with your pikes, and it can be as graceful as someone hefting a fifteen-to-eighteen-foot long thing of wood can get. Which is not very.[/list] I'll say. Slim Jim Pickens fucked around with this message at 20:17 on Nov 27, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 20:14
|
|
|
Slim Jim Pickens posted:I understand that you don't want to actually kill people, but what's the point of re-enacting a pike push when you're not going to use your weapons at all. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 20:20
|
|
|
So according to these reenactors, the 30 Y war was basically the deadliest mosh / pogo pit of all times.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 20:25
|
|
|
a travelling HEGEL posted:Yep. The first and last time this comes down to physical strength (and it is a taxing job) is when you heft that bitch and balance it. The rest is about thinking and skill. Is there any mention of natural drift of the formation in the sources? What I mean is we've all heard how Greek phalanxes naturally drifted to the right, but did something similar happen in the pike blocks of this time period?
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 20:26
|
|
|
a travelling HEGEL posted:He didn't post it, but he told me where I could find it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 20:26
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:This is a clear case of failure to stab a dude in the face. I love how the local viking re-enacters don't do this at all and my friend who is involved regularly ends up having no skin on his hands from the spear-fencing. Because they are all crazy. Look at the space between these dudes: The image is crude, of course, but we can see that it's pretty wide. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 20:28
|
|
|
Rabhadh posted:If you want your arrow to go where you think you're aiming, instead of off to right/left, your arrows have to be "spined". Basically they have to flex correctly with the bow. You know, there was no common way that spine was to be measured before Rheingans & Nagler came up with a method in the late 1930s. I've posted about this in the bow thread over at TFR, but old manuals like Taybugha's book speak of a certain ratio of arrowhead to shaft weight that the finished projectile should have (which also affects spine). Those were sorted for exact weight, but I think they'd also remove those that weren't consistent with the set after shooting (I've read that about turkish flight shooting in Klopsteg's book). Reed was also a material for military arrows that were produced in bulk, as was bamboo. Contrary to wood like cedar, spruce, beech, etc. there's a great advantage in bamboo: the material is very consistent. You can match diameter and the way the nodules are arranged on your shafts and it's very likely that the arrows will have a similar weigth and spine. Bamboo is awesome. Power Khan fucked around with this message at 20:33 on Nov 27, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 20:30
|
|
|
I never knew that people were talking literally about "pushing matches" between groups of pikes. That's just so stupid. If one group of soldiers raised their pikes to close in and shove the enemy with their shoulders, couldn't the other soldiers just lower their pikes before the enemy closes in?
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 21:15
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:I never knew that people were talking literally about "pushing matches" between groups of pikes. That's just so stupid. Rodrigo Diaz posted:...and https://www.thearma.org has a bunch of fechtbuchs. HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 21:34 on Nov 27, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 21:21
|
|
|
You've never done this job before? Well, here's a point stick, and off you go. Von der Pike auf lernen
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 21:42
|
|
|
InspectorBloor posted:You've never done this job before? Well, here's a point stick, and off you go. Von der Pike auf lernen
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 21:46
|
|
|
Let me guess, you take up apprenticeship with some older soldier and he makes you wash his poopy pants and take out the buckets. No seriously, I imagine that like picking up a trade. You start as Gesell and run all the trivial stuff for your master.
Power Khan fucked around with this message at 22:14 on Nov 27, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 22:09
|
|
|
Hegel, out of curiosity how did most pike-on-pike engagements play out? Given that both opposing sides each have equally long pikes, did people just end up stabbing each other simultaneously? Or would both formations advance to just outside the pikes' reach and then occasionally lunge and jabs into the enemy formation? Also, how common were pike-on-pike engagements once muskets/musketoons came into play?
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 22:11
|
|
|
If you are 70 and still in the job of stabbing dudes in the face with a pike you did something fundamentally wrong along the way.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 22:19
|
|
|
ArchangeI posted:If you are 70 and still in the job of stabbing dudes in the face with a pike you did something fundamentally wrong along the way.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 22:27
|
|
|
ArchangeI posted:If you are 70 and still in the job of stabbing dudes in the face with a pike you did something fundamentally wrong along the way.  ) but the guy I found today was 70 and had enlisted in his forties, and he's not the only one who did. And I have no idea why. Can you have a middle age crisis in the middle ages? Most of the very old men are musketeers anyway, which is still heavy work but involves somewhat less exertion, plus you don't have to wear a breastplate. But "good life decisions" is not high on my list of things I think about when I think about these people. Bacarruda posted:Hegel, out of curiosity how did most pike-on-pike engagements play out?
Even after the development and wide use of the musket, pikes still remain important, since muskets are slow and fiddly, and you can armor yourself against them. However, the proportion of musketeers to pike gradually increases throughout the 15 and 1600s. A musketoon is a short-barreled musket that cavalry use. HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 22:48 on Nov 27, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 22:45
|
|
)
|
ArchangeI posted:If you are 70 and still in the job of stabbing dudes in the face with a pike you did something fundamentally wrong along the way. Since this post got me wondering, what would retirement look like for an old soldier in this era and earlier? Would he even be able to retire? If so, how would he support himself?
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 22:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 20:34 |
|
|
I would have a question related to pikechat: Once I read somewhere that the janissaries were so effective largely because of their ability to employ very individualistic tactics, basically infiltrating rigid European pike formations, and breaking them with swords. While pikesmen would be paralyzed in such close quarters combat, the janissaries, trained to fight on their own, without need for a formation, would thrive in the chaos they caused. Of course, I can't quite retrace this argument, and some of the stuff Hegel's been writing about makes me doubt this hypothesis. There's also the fact that janissaries did in fact fight as compact units, even developing modern tactics parallel to Europe at least up to the volley fire revolution, and the notion of them as loosely organized warriors seems at odds with that. steinrokkan fucked around with this message at 22:58 on Nov 27, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2013 22:55
|
|