|
Rodrigo Diaz posted:I am planning to make a nice dagger or two in time, but not for Hegel.
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 02:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 13:34 |
|
|
HEY GAL posted:some goddamn daggers, for me, for no cost http://www.woodenswords.com/category_s/1833.htm
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 03:30
|
|
|
Now I want to call them about these and see if they'll do a special order for pikes. They won't, SOP is to go to a carpenter's and tell them what you want, but it'd be funny to ask.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 04:49
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:Now I want to call them about these and see if they'll do a special order for pikes. They won't, SOP is to go to a carpenter's and tell them what you want, but it'd be funny to ask. You'd be surprised, Purpleheart is actually pretty good with helping out its customers.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 18:16
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:Now I want to call them about these and see if they'll do a special order for pikes. They won't, SOP is to go to a carpenter's and tell them what you want, but it'd be funny to ask. How do they make such long pieces? With a large dowel maker or an oversized lathe?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
Verisimilidude posted:You'd be surprised, Purpleheart is actually pretty good with helping out its customers. JaucheCharly posted:How do they make such long pieces? With a large dowel maker or an oversized lathe? Edit: In case you're wondering, you chain them to your ceiling. HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 22:41 on Jan 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2015 22:32
|
|
|
Was slings ever a commonplace thing in armies during ancient times? If so, whats the main reason it went out of fashion? I recon its easier to supply a mass of people with slings and rocks for ammo, but I guess it got less range and power than bows.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
GyverMac posted:Was slings ever a commonplace thing in armies during ancient times? If so, whats the main reason it went out of fashion? I recon its easier to supply a mass of people with slings and rocks for ammo, but I guess it got less range and power than bows. Slings are even harder to use properly than bows, and slings usually used metal bullets as ammo instead of rocks. They got hella range and serious hitting power. though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2015 19:23
|
|
|
The best inscription on a projectile "Catch!"
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2015 20:09
|
|
|
Slings are recorded in Ireland during the Norman invasion, Giraldus Cambrensis lists them as one of the main weapons of the Irish. Massed slingers (both normal slings and staff slings) behind field fortifications was one of the more effective Irish solutions to the devastating Norman cavalry superiority. They disappear pretty quickly though as the Irish realise after the Norman invasion that the traditional "rising out" (a kind of fyrd but with much more red tape) is essentially useless for dealing with the new enemy who is more interested in building castles and taking over territory rather than extracting fealty and slings are not an honourable weapon as mentioned in the Brehon Laws (the only guys using them are the semi-nomadic pastoralists that have been impressed). Irish forces got more professional as the medieval period wore on and the slings seem to be replaced on the battlefield by bows.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2015 20:10
|
|
|
JaucheCharly posted:The best inscription on a projectile "Catch!" How do slings and bows stack up to each other?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2015 20:28
|
|
|
Rockopolis posted:How do slings and bows stack up to each other? Off the top of my head there was an engagement in Spain where English longbowmen faced some Spanish slingers, I think there was more of them but the longbowmen came off the better anyway. edit: was the Battle of Najera, 4000 slingers vs 12000 longbows Rabhadh fucked around with this message at 20:50 on Jan 31, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2015 20:45
|
|
|
Rockopolis posted:I liked "I hope this hits you in the dick!" Slinger bullets are fast and heavy, and so impart more kinetic energy on impact than an arrow. They were noted to injure soldiers through their armour, like other blunt forces. Compared to the basic bows used by the Greeks, slingers were much more effective. Incan and Aztec slingers were reportedly capable of killing horses and cleaving through steel cuirasses. Slingers don't work as well on fortifications because you need a fair bit of space to really use one. An archer or crossbowmen can prepare their weapon in cover and only expose themselves slightly. Given how sieges were so important to medieval warfare, it isn't coincidental that slingers stopped being so common.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2015 21:04
|
|
|
How heavy were slinger bullets? Greek archery isn't exactly a highlight of the art in every way.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2015 22:08
|
|
|
Not sure if this goes here or the fencing thread, but the Wiktenauer is doing a fund drive right now and part of their stretch goals are getting publically available copies of medieval combat manuscripts from museums, if anyone is interested.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2015 22:39
|
|
|
JaucheCharly posted:How heavy were slinger bullets? Greek archery isn't exactly a highlight of the art in every way. They're rocks or lead projectiles of varying sizes. I think a pound is the maximum mass slingable, but most people probably used lighter stones. They're also being flung really loving fast, without drag from fletching, at a fairly flat trajectory, I think they had much faster terminal velocities than arrows.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2015 22:40
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:Not sure if this goes here or the fencing thread, but the Wiktenauer is doing a fund drive right now and part of their stretch goals are getting publically available copies of medieval combat manuscripts from museums, if anyone is interested.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2015 23:43
|
|
|
Here.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2015 23:46
|
|
|
Slim Jim Pickens posted:They're rocks or lead projectiles of varying sizes. I think a pound is the maximum mass slingable, but most people probably used lighter stones. http://slinging.org/index.php?page=sling-ranges http://slinging.org/index.php?page=the-ballistics-of-the-sling---thom-richardson Doesn't seem to do so great with "light" bullets, but not bad. Here comes the longbow and a war arrow. The quarterpound arrow: http://www.theenglishwarbowsociety.com/quarter-pound-arrow.html How far the dudes shoot: http://74.209.214.7/~englishw/records2013_EN.html At best, the output is comparable if not better, but you're shooting steel, not lead or a rock.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2015 09:37
|
|
|
Dumb idea time: Question: how to keep tournament fighting real? Answer: Give each fighter a single life for the whole tournament. You get hit (maybe restrict it to "get hit in the head/body") and you are out. The winner will be the last one standing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2015 19:14
|
|
|
Nektu posted:Dumb idea time: Sooooo, everyone goes off into their own corner and huddles up?
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2015 22:02
|
|
|
the JJ posted:Sooooo, everyone goes off into their own corner and huddles up? Unsportsmanlike conduct, your teams have 30 seconds to move out or be disqualified.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2015 22:03
|
|
|
Nektu posted:Dumb idea time: Bad idea, since it doesn't really give people a chance to be super technical rather than super defensive. Also sword hits to the head and body weren't guaranteed kills, unless you're thrusting someone through the face. Also hand, leg, and arm hits are all very valuable in their own right, and many of the texts regarding historical fighting refer specifically to severing hands or piercing feet.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 00:05
|
|
|
Verisimilidude posted:Also sword hits to the head and body weren't guaranteed kills...  Imagine being chased by that guy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 00:26
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:And even the kills aren't insta-kills. Even if the blood flow is stopped, the brains will have oxygen for some seconds. Striking a few blows sounds realistic, but running 200 paces may be a bit exaggerated. Only blows to the brain or the spinal cord will stop a human instantly.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 00:37
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:Even if the blood flow is stopped, the brains will have oxygen for some seconds. Striking a few blows sounds realistic, but running 200 paces may be a bit exaggerated.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 00:38
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:It makes sense that the witnesses and the guy he was chasing might have exaggerated though. You think you've dropped him, and then holy poo poo I hope he was wearing his brown breeches.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 00:42
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:And even the kills aren't insta-kills. This is metal as gently caress. Where did you find this?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 01:32
|
|
|
Verisimilidude posted:This is metal as gently caress. Where did you find this?  (There are very few people in the world who have poked the brain of a King of France, and he's one of them) Bullet removers--check out the smug loving handles on the top one:  This is for taking bits of mail out of a wound:  One interesting thing about his work is that he's pretty optimistic about the chances of recovering from abdominal surgery. He tells you to "remove the filth" from the wound, gives instructions for how to stitch it up (on intestines or the stomach you use the kind of stitches that you would use to attach two abutting pieces of leather when making a buff coat, not the kind of stitches you would use for skin), and then he says things might be touch and go but it's not an irrevocable death sentence. Edit: Here's how you tell if a guy has a skull fracture. First step is scalp him, but the human skull has sutures and weird lines and poo poo, and although there are certain similarities everyone's different. So how can you tell where the fracture is, if it's not severe enough to be welling blood or whatever? Here's some methods he's seen mentioned:  And here's what he does: 
HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 01:52 on Feb 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 01:44
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:A 17th century English translation of the collected works of Ambroise Pare (approx 1510 - 1590), possibly the best surgeon of his generation. He was Henry II's surgeon, for instance, and did his autopsy, and he wants us to know that contrary to popular assumption it wasn't the lance wound that killed him: Can you share the text's name? I'd love to get my hands on it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 02:28
|
|
|
Verisimilidude posted:Can you share the text's name? I'd love to get my hands on it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 02:38
|
|
|
JaucheCharly posted:http://slinging.org/index.php?page=sling-ranges I'm not surprised that longbows are more powerful than slings, although it seems unfair to compare slings with technology at least 2000 years more modern. I don't think the material has any effect on the impact, because I've never heard of arrows killing somebody without penetrating their armour, while bullets were widely known to be capable of doing so. GyverMac posted:Was slings ever a commonplace thing in armies during ancient times? If so, whats the main reason it went out of fashion? I recon its easier to supply a mass of people with slings and rocks for ammo, but I guess it got less range and power than bows. Nobody's army is really training slingers en-masse . The most skilled slingers in classical times came from Rhodes or the Balearics where they developed a mercenary industry, but everybody who picks up slinging is doing it because they need to guard their livestock. Whereas a steppe nomad can ride around on a horse and get somebody to make a fancy composite bow, a Balearic shepherd needs to trot up and down hills all day and doesn't know how to make a worthwhile bow. He'll throw rocks at other rocks, or wolves, maybe people, all day and get really good at it. Thing is, "lifestyle" weapons get isolated to specific groups of people, and over time demographic changes can make them less relevant. The middle ages see professional armies develop, and there isn't much place in those for shepherds from the booniest of boonies.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 02:41
|
|
|
Slim Jim Pickens posted:I'm not surprised that longbows are more powerful than slings, although it seems unfair to compare slings with technology at least 2000 years more modern. I don't think the material has any effect on the impact, because I've never heard of arrows killing somebody without penetrating their armour, while bullets were widely known to be capable of doing so. There were professional armies a long time before the Middle Ages. And some of those ancient armies did have professional slingers. I'm not sure if anyone trained even archers en-masse. Weren't they, like slingers, from groups that were accustomed to their weapon from a young age.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 02:50
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:There were professional armies a long time before the Middle Ages. And some of those ancient armies did have professional slingers. I'm not sure if anyone trained even archers en-masse. Weren't they, like slingers, from groups that were accustomed to their weapon from a young age. You're absolutely right. I thought the idea of rounding up random schlubs and trying to teach them how to sling was so silly that I just stopped thinking there. Since ranged weapons in general take more time to get acquainted with, I'm wondering if it's possible that a military might not have any ranged weapons due to a lack of recruits familiar with bows or whatnot. Does your average peasant own a bow?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 04:22
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:And even the kills aren't insta-kills. Remind me never to aim for the fubflance of the heart if I'm forced to fight a duel.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 05:58
|
|
|
The long s is cool and good and not very hard to read at all
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 06:41
|
|
|
I fpent many pleafant afternoons reading Lavoifier in college in a period tranflation, which included detailed inftructions for how to gently caress the air out of a hollow tube.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 06:58
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:how to gently caress the air out of a hollow tube.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 07:12
|
|
|
Slim Jim Pickens posted:I don't think the material has any effect on the impact, because I've never heard of arrows killing somebody without penetrating their armour, while bullets were widely known to be capable of doing so. If two projectile have about the same weight and travel about the same max distance, it follows that they must travel about at the same velocity. Factor in airdrag but they still seem to go about the same max distance as can be seen above, which means that this is about even, or the arrow has slightly higher velocity at start. They'll have the same momentum and the same KE when they hit something at the same distance. Both projectiles hit you with the same force. Is there some arcane reason why these 80-100J to the head will not injure or kill you from one, but from the other if it's about blunt trauma? If it's about penetrating, then the size of the surface that hits and material of that projectile are also important. If you shoot two similar projectiles with the same force at a plate of metal, it matters if one is tipped with wood and the other with steel. If the projectile just collapses, there's no penetration. You can google for shatter gap, which is exactly this problem. You shouldn't rule out the possibility that you just didn't hear about people getting struck to death by an arrow, as getting one's skull smashed with a steel or lead pipe doesn't matter for the person in question.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 08:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 13:34 |
|
|
JaucheCharly posted:If two projectile have about the same weight and travel about the same max distance, it follows that they must travel about at the same velocity. Factor in airdrag but they still seem to go about the same max distance as can be seen above, which means that this is about even, or the arrow has slightly higher velocity at start. They'll have the same momentum and the same KE when they hit something at the same distance. Both projectiles hit you with the same force. Is there some arcane reason why these 80-100J to the head will not injure or kill you from one, but from the other if it's about blunt trauma? You're assuming that both projectiles are being launched at the same angle. The slinging website doesn't elaborate on the angle of launch for their tests, but the longbow records are the results of a flight shooting competition where it's normal to fire at 45 degrees. Without having to guess about angles, we can just use muzzle velocities. The muzzle velocity of an arrow from a longbow (0.1kg) is 50 m/s. 125J The muzzle velocity of a sling stone (0.2kg) is 30m/s. 90J The muzzle velocity of a sling bullet (0.08kg) is 30m/s. 49J The muzzle velocity of an arrow from a Greek bow (0.03kg) is 60m/s. 54J  I could only find a single source for greek bows The stones impact with more energy than an equivalent bow. The arrows from a longbow are even nastier. Even if some velocity is lost to friction, a longbow arrow that bounces off a French knight is hitting at least as hard as a rock slung at a Persian noble. On the other hand, an Greek arrow and a lighter bullet are roughly similar, which is telling of the Greek archer's intended role. I couldn't find any sources on contemporary Persian or Levantine bows, but I suspect they were more advanced. quote:If it's about penetrating, then the size of the surface that hits and material of that projectile are also important. If you shoot two similar projectiles with the same force at a plate of metal, it matters if one is tipped with wood and the other with steel. If the projectile just collapses, there's no penetration. You can google for shatter gap, which is exactly this problem. What I was trying to say was that arrows might need to be tipped with steel to penetrate armour, a bullet isn't intended to, so it can be made with any material, so long as it can still hit a target at a good speed. quote:You shouldn't rule out the possibility that you just didn't hear about people getting struck to death by an arrow, as getting one's skull smashed with a steel or lead pipe doesn't matter for the person in question. Vegetius identifies out sling wounds as being "mortal without the loss of blood", in direct comparison to arrows.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2015 10:39
|
|