|
The Lone Badger posted:The Haber process takes a ton of fuel. Germany had access to fuel. edit: this isn't me being facetious, Germany had by far the highest electricity production in Europe in 1940. There was also a lot of coal available, both from Germany and from the occupied territories. Dance Officer fucked around with this message at 17:35 on Jan 5, 2023 |
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 17:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 13:43 |
|
|
samcarsten posted:has there ever been a sword and pistol fighting style or is that solely a hollywood thing? By which i mean, sword in one hand, pistol in the other. It is true that some historical figures were known to have used both a sword and a pistol in combat, and there were also some historical fencing manuals that included techniques for using a sword and a pistol together. However, it is unlikely that there was ever a formalized "style" of sword and pistol fighting, as the use of both weapons in close combat would be very difficult and impractical. In most cases, swords and pistols were used for different purposes, with swords being used for close-range melee combat and pistols being used for ranged attacks. Using both weapons together would require a high level of skill and coordination, and it would be difficult to defend against an opponent using only one weapon. Therefore, it is more likely that the use of a sword and a pistol together in combat was more of a novelty or a last resort rather than a regular fighting style. I presented your question to ChatGPT and that was the response
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 17:26
|
|
|
thatbastardken posted:I recall some discussion about German agriculture of the period being heavily reliant on small family farms that used a lot of manual labor instead of machinery. Probably not helped by the delayed movement to a war economy. While this is true (in general 1930's/40's Germany was not heavily motorized, and relied heavily on human and animal labor), I'm more interested in the relative reduction in farm output compared to prior years. Flappy Bert posted:I believe the book later goes into detail about how rations were used as motivation - the standard was in fact substandard, and intentionally underfeeding non-Germans was to varying degrees explicit policy, in order to contrast good food held out for performance. Yeah, but that was AIUI later on; earlier the rations were more equitable across the board, which of course lead to complaints like "proper Germans are starving [on a 2500cal/day ration] and meanwhile we're glutting foreign workers on fine pork and wine". Eventually they did cut back food, but since I'm curious about initial poor productivity, I don't think that food is a factor. Unless of course I'm missing something! Tomn posted:The book goes into more detail on this later, but yes fertilizer getting blockaded had a major impact on continental harvests as their agricultural sector was heavily reliant on those. There were also knock-on effects elsewhere - fuel shortages for instance meant the demechanization of farms in France if I recall correctly. In general the book points out that the French economy depended heavily on imports and its colonial empire for raw materials and being subjected to the blockade once it became a part of the Nazi economy threw everything into a tailspin and meant that capturing the factories of France didn't mean as much for the Nazis as it did on paper since there just weren't the raw materials necessary to feed them. Aha, that makes sense! You'd think that after the book goes into so much detail on how reliant Germany was on imports, and how huge a problem its foreign currency deficit was, that I'd figure out that other, more developed countries in the area would be even more reliant on imports. Welp. quote:Doesn't Wages of Destruction make the point that the Germans didn't actually NEED to encourage more women to farm because women already made up a major part of the pre-war agricultural labor force, more so than in Britain for instance? Kinda goes hand-in-hand with small inefficient family farms really, the "family" part of it DOES imply that women are going to be involved... Yes, my understanding is that Germany had an extremely high labor participation rate, and that the government was doing everything it could to direct all of that labor towards the war effort. There were not a lot of people sitting around idle. Their labor may not have been very efficient (see also the helmet manufacturing process), but there was a lot of effort put into trying to make sure everyone was contributing. Dance Officer posted:Germany had access to fuel. Not anywhere near enough of it. Petroleum in particular was in extremely short supply, and while they had a fair amount of coal, their coal needs were immense, since it was the fundamental fuel driving their economy. Wages of Destruction notes that the Wehrmacht seriously considered de-motorizing the military to reduce their fuel consumption. Plus, both the Kriegsmarine and Regia Marina ended up in dock most of the time because there simply wasn't the fuel for them to make sorties. (and when they did they had a tendency to get sunk) The economic (i.e. non-ideological) reasons for invading the Soviet Union were a) to seize the farmlands of Ukraine, and b) to get the oil fields of the Caucasus. Both were desperately needed...and they only got one. It turns out that land wars in Asia are hard!
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 17:32
|
|
|
samcarsten posted:has there ever been a sword and pistol fighting style or is that solely a hollywood thing? By which i mean, sword in one hand, pistol in the other. The thing to remember is that prior to revolvers and the like, reloading a muzzle-loaded pistol (such as you might see in Hollywood pirate films) takes both hands and at least twenty seconds or so. That doesn't really lend itself well to any kind of "fighting style" which seems to presuppose complex forms and tactics and the like when your own only really relevant tactical option is "Shoot the enemy" followed by "Discard pistol (possibly by throwing at the enemy's head)" potentially followed by "Draw other prepared pistol and goto 10." It also doesn't synergize that well with a sword, given that the pistol is best used before getting into sword range and once you're in sword range you don't really have a chance to reload or make use of a fired pistol. That being said "Shoot a pistol while closing to sword range and then discarding it as you charge into a melee" is certainly a thing that happened. But there's kind of a limit to the possibilities of gun-kata when you only realistically get one shot per fight. Edit: Dance Officer posted:Germany had access to fuel. Maybe, but "Having a lot of fuel in absolute terms" isn't the same thing as "Having enough fuel to meet all needs," given that Germany needed that coal for all kinds of things. I don't think the Nazis ever really felt like they had enough coal as I recall and an inefficient fuel-intensive process would be considered a painful necessity instead of a minor cost. Tomn fucked around with this message at 17:46 on Jan 5, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 17:43
|
|
|
Tomn posted:
Yeah exactly. This is really the outline of the Highland charge - buckler on the left arm, pistol in the left hand, sword in the right, crash into the enemy while shootin' guns and swinging sword and yelling a lot - which is a shock attack for breaking lines and formations and not a method of continued or sustained engagement between lines.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 17:51
|
|
|
So did they go back and find their pistol later? Maybe they didn't care which one they picked up later on? Seems like a relatively expensive item to just throw at someone or drop on the ground, especially if you're in a non-professional army that isn't providing you with your weapons.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 17:57
|
|
|
Jamwad Hilder posted:So did they go back and find their pistol later? Maybe they didn't care which one they picked up later on? Seems like a relatively expensive item to just throw at someone or drop on the ground, especially if you're in a non-professional army that isn't providing you with your weapons.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 18:00
|
|
|
Popular depictions have shown people with multiple pistols on a cord or something that keeps them connected to your body. Grab, fire, drop, and try to remember not to grab the same pistol again if you're carrying more than one.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 18:09
|
|
|
I mean, the fact that they made a collective noun for "as many pistols as a person could practically carry and still use" (i.e. "brace") means that the idea of having a bunch of pistols on you was at least something that was discussed a lot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 18:20
|
|
|
I thought a brace of something means a pair. Is there an entirely different definition when we're talking about guns?
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 18:48
|
|
|
Jamwad Hilder posted:I thought a brace of something means a pair. Is there an entirely different definition when we're talking about guns? I see someone has never asked a group of people how big “a couple” is, where a word you think means “2” actually means “a small, indefinite number” to many people. Edit to explain, it meant two originally (it’s from the French for “arm”) but that was in 1400 and just go ask some people how much a couple vs a few is. You’ll quickly find those numbers are very fuzzy. Now imagine it’s been 300 years in a mostly semi-literate population. Xiahou Dun fucked around with this message at 18:56 on Jan 5, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 18:53
|
|
|
Jamwad Hilder posted:I thought a brace of something means a pair. Is there an entirely different definition when we're talking about guns? Yeah, it generally means a pair. It's a kind of archaic term, but you still find it used with guns because of old, matched pairs being a thing. Obviously it's a thing with dueling sets but you'll also find it with more mundane poo poo like boot guns. I've also seen it with pairs that aren't identical pistols but were made or detailed by the same smith. So something like a normal pistol and a smaller boot gun that are both trimmed out the same way and belong together as a set. See also: The Lord of the Rings. When Sam catches a "brace of coneys" for dinner what he's saying is that he killed two rabbits.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 18:56
|
|
|
Only two? Since these are single shot I always assumed a brace was like a bandolier with six pistols on it
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 18:59
|
|
|
Would these kinds of muzzle loaded pistols be good as basically a parrying weapon? Id imagine theyd be fine since theyre made out of a chunk of wood and some metal so youd basically have a club of wood after shooting some jerk in the stomach. Of course I could be wrong and theyre terrible for that or too expensive to be used like that. I mean ive seen old italian dueling manuals expousing the use of capes so i'd imagine the pistol would be as good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 19:00
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:I see someone has never asked a group of people how big “a couple” is, where a word you think means “2” actually means “a small, indefinite number” to many people. Yeah I get that, I just didn't know if it was a word they used literally to mean two, or if it was a colloquialism of sorts. I've only ever heard it in context where someone actually meant a pair of things. Like in Cyrano's example actually. Cyrano4747 posted:Yeah, it generally means a pair. It's a kind of archaic term, but you still find it used with guns because of old, matched pairs being a thing. Obviously it's a thing with dueling sets but you'll also find it with more mundane poo poo like boot guns. I've also seen it with pairs that aren't identical pistols but were made or detailed by the same smith. So something like a normal pistol and a smaller boot gun that are both trimmed out the same way and belong together as a set. That makes sense, thanks
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 19:01
|
|
|
VostokProgram posted:Only two? Since these are single shot I always assumed a brace was like a bandolier with six pistols on it Noted historical documentary media Assassin's Creed: Black Flag allowed you to upgrade your bandolier to the point where you carried like 6 or 8 pistols, it was a great way to open a boarding attack. Defenestrategy posted:Would these kinds of muzzle loaded pistols be good as basically a parrying weapon? Id imagine theyd be fine since theyre made out of a chunk of wood and some metal so youd basically have a club of wood after shooting some jerk in the stomach. Of course I could be wrong and theyre terrible for that or too expensive to be used like that. I mean ive seen old italian dueling manuals expousing the use of capes so i'd imagine the pistol would be as good. Lack of a crossguard beyond say a guard around the trigger meant that a pistol wouldn't be the best choice for parrying a sword, it might not catch/stop on anything and continue on and slice you anyway. I do vaguely recall a seeing a few pistols with rapier basket-like stuff around the grip in castles/museums though, so some arms makers did think of it. Whether these weapons were ceremonial or practical, I can't say. As well, some pistols did have capped and/or spiked butts to make them better clubs, or hell, some had like axe heads and poo poo on the end of the butt.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 19:06
|
|
|
Yeah a lot of cool poo poo like at the Buffalo Bill museum was custom made. It was easier to get that when there wasn’t really mass interchangeable design. At most there were established patterns.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 19:23
|
|
|
Arrath posted:Noted historical documentary media Assassin's Creed: Black Flag allowed you to upgrade your bandolier to the point where you carried like 6 or 8 pistols, it was a great way to open a boarding attack. Even if they were practical, the sky is the limit for weird rich guy / nobility "practical" weapons in the 15th-18th centuries, and that's the exact sort of thing that tends to be preserved in castles and armories etc. long enough to get put on display in a 21st century museum. Wheel lock guns are the easiest and most common example. They're fundamentally superior to flintlocks in pretty much every way, but the complexity and expense meant that they were never going to be general issue for a military. Rifles fall into the same category for a long time. People knew rifling would lead to increased range and accuracy for a long time, but the issue was always how to a) make them cheaply and b) deal with black powder fouling making the gun un-shootable relatively quickly. I want to say they would need to be cleaned something like every ~5ish shots, which isn't tenable for something that is going to be used in protracted battles. The expanding-base bullet is what ultimately fixed that problem just in time for the American Civil War. But even so, you can find extremely high quality rifles used by hunters all the way back into the 1600s. edit: you'll also see rifles in early military service as sharpshooter, skirmisher, scout etc. weapons. edit 2: to be clear, way early rifles were fancy pants things but there's this period in the 18th century where they're still no good for general issue for infantry, but are cheap enough to make that they become common for hunting. The Kentucky long rifle is probably the most famous example of that. Then you get the really weird poo poo. There's all sorts of hosed up and neat one-offs, but something that actually saw a resonable amount of rich guy use (by the standard here - basically not a workshop prototype) were the different variations on the Lorenzoni repeating system. See this gun?  That's a napoleonic-wars era repeating flint lock pistol. 8 shots according to the Christies auction listing I stole the photo from. Note the round bit behind the barrel and note the lever on it. It works like so:  After firing you tilt the gun down and rotate the lever all the way in one direction. That gravity feeds a powder charge into the chamber and a ball into a little ball holder, both of which are stored in reservoirs in the stock. Then you rotate the handle to the first stop ahead of the trigger guard, which lets the ball roll forward into the rest of the chamber (which is in the barrel), then once the ball is in place you rotate the handle all the way back to the firing position and your gunpower charge is now behind the ball. Pull trigger, repeat. The main problem is that this requires an obscene amount of careful fitting of parts, in an age when all of this is done by hand or with hand-powered tools (so treadle powered drills and lathes etc). That rotating bit needs to mate perfectly with the barrel, otherwise the hot gasses are going to find ways to escape that aren't out the barrel. I would also assume that it's a delicate mechanism and one that requires a fair bit of maintenance or at the very least care. You don't want your precision-fitted rotating breach rusting, for example, and cleaning that after firing black poweder has to be a real treat. No idea what caliber that's in, but I'm going to assume the action is weaker than a comparable muzzle loader so it's also probably a bit on the anemic side. But hey, if you're a rich enough dude you can have an 8 shot magazine fed pistol in an age when everyone else's "oh gently caress I missed" follow up plan involves seeing how well their gun works as a club. At that point you probably have servants to clean your expensive clockwork pistols anyways. Cyrano4747 fucked around with this message at 19:30 on Jan 5, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 19:28
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Even if they were practical, the sky is the limit for weird rich guy / nobility "practical" weapons in the 15th-18th centuries, and that's the exact sort of thing that tends to be preserved in castles and armories etc. long enough to get put on display in a 21st century museum. Wheel lock guns are the easiest and most common example. They're fundamentally superior to flintlocks in pretty much every way, but the complexity and expense meant that they were never going to be general issue for a military. what the gently caress I was going to bring up the pistols i've seen in museums that have actual on purpose club and even axe elements (usually at the pommel) but what the gently caress i'm completely derailed
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 19:31
|
|
|
Tulip posted:what the gently caress You should check out what the Swiss were doing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vd8SaNzeZqk&t=138s
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 19:39
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:I mean, the fact that they made a collective noun for "as many pistols as a person could practically carry and still use" (i.e. "brace") means that the idea of having a bunch of pistols on you was at least something that was discussed a lot. American Civil War cavalry (so without the same transport issues of being on foot) would sometimes carry like 4 pistols/revolvers and a sabre, if I recall correctly. Check out this lad
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 19:49
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:You should check out what the Swiss were doing: I can just see some nobleman pulling these out without warning and “shooting” his guests as a prank.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 19:53
|
|
|
Tomn posted:Maybe, but "Having a lot of fuel in absolute terms" isn't the same thing as "Having enough fuel to meet all needs," given that Germany needed that coal for all kinds of things. I don't think the Nazis ever really felt like they had enough coal as I recall and an inefficient fuel-intensive process would be considered a painful necessity instead of a minor cost. Also a lot of German coal is lovely lignite, not Welsh or Pennsylvania anthracite.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 19:59
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:You should check out what the Swiss were doing: God I wish I had the space and disposable income to collect wheel lock guns. The only kind of firearms I’ve ever been interested in.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 20:02
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Even if they were practical, the sky is the limit for weird rich guy / nobility "practical" weapons in the 15th-18th centuries, and that's the exact sort of thing that tends to be preserved in castles and armories etc. long enough to get put on display in a 21st century museum. Wheel lock guns are the easiest and most common example. They're fundamentally superior to flintlocks in pretty much every way, but the complexity and expense meant that they were never going to be general issue for a military. I'm thinking that with a bit of use and wear, black powder particles are going to coat the outside of that rotating cylinder, leading to a shot that detonates the powder reservoir.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 20:23
|
|
|
ponzicar posted:I'm thinking that with a bit of use and wear, black powder particles are going to coat the outside of that rotating cylinder, leading to a shot that detonates the powder reservoir. I would be way, WAY more worried about an unburned ember inside the chamber doing that instead. Usually not a problem with things in a ~pistol or ~rifle size, more of an issue with artillery, but you also usually don't have the option of tossing more powder inside the barrel a split second after firing a normal muzzle loader. The bigger issue to my mind is also that you're using an un-patched ball. Black powder fouls barrels at an incredible rate (see my earlier comment about the problems with this and rifling). Most guns get around this by using significantly sub-caliber balls and then using a patch on the ball to tighten it in the barrel. Patches compress more readily than lead, so it's easier to get the ball rammed home on a filthy barrel. No patch means you're either going to have a ton of gas by-blow around the bullet (leading to poo poo accuracy and anemic muzzle velocity) or you have a tight barrel/ball fit in which case you're not getting that many shots out of it before it's too fouled to shoot. I suspect it's the latter, and that the maximum number of shots you can safely fire is also the number stored in the magazine. All that said, I've never heard of these things being hand grenades in the making. I suspect that if it was a significant design problem they would be even more of a historical footnote, and that footnote would reference Lord Fancybottoms, 18th Earl of WestOxenShire, blowing his hand off.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 20:40
|
|
|
The talk of disposable weapons and expense reminded me of this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-aSsD19dAgk tl;dw it's a real-time forging of a historical reproduction of a military arrowhead. It takes 18 minutes for a modern expert working from modern industrially-produced stock in an streamlined, comfortable coal-forge workshop to produce one (1) wrought-iron arrowhead. When adding in fletching, shaft production, and fitting, the labour and expense for creating the heaps of arrows necessary for archery warfare is enormous on its own, and that's basically just disposable materiel. A dozen arrows represents days of work, probably by multiple skilled specialists. Warfare is expensive.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 21:17
|
|
|
CommonShore posted:
Eh, not quite disposable. They collected arrows after battles and most armies traveled with fletchers to repair any that were damaged prior to reuse. I've also seen mention of them being bundled up to ship back to England during the 100 years war for refurbing in centralized facilities (Tower of London IIRC). The arrowheads were most valuable and the most durable part, the shafts and fletching were relatively quick to replace. No source, but I remember reading somewhere about a workshop of 10 fletchers getting 10,000 arrows done in 10 days - the numbers obviously stick in your head. That might be a bit of rule of thumb or whatever as I'm usually skeptical of round numbers like that, but 100 arrows / day fletched doesn't seem insane if you assume a long work day like you'd pull for a big, government order.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 21:28
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Eh, not quite disposable. They collected arrows after battles and most armies traveled with fletchers to repair any that were damaged prior to reuse. I've also seen mention of them being bundled up to ship back to England during the 100 years war for refurbing in centralized facilities (Tower of London IIRC). I wonder how much of the process that represents. I can see 100/day if we're talking final assembly with materials prepped and ready to go, yeah that sounds doable, but making 100 shafts from rough wood stock much less so, at least not with any of the desirable regularity and precision. Even with modern power tools turning rough wood into 100 straight and relatively splinter-free shafts would be a long day's work.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 21:43
|
|
|
Really just about anything metal would have been scooped up and recycled after the fact (either by the winning side or locals) right? If only because it was so good damned expensive to produce in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 21:55
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
CommonShore posted:I wonder how much of the process that represents. I can see 100/day if we're talking final assembly with materials prepped and ready to go, yeah that sounds doable, but making 100 shafts from rough wood stock much less so, at least not with any of the desirable regularity and precision. Even with modern power tools turning rough wood into 100 straight and relatively splinter-free shafts would be a long day's work. Arrow shafts were from coppiced wood, which grows very straight. I imagine they did not do much turning of wood and instead rejected insufficiently straight shafts, but that's conjecture on my part.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 22:07
|
|
|
Nessus posted:I imagine this particular assault stance was held by some pirates and/or nautical marines back in the day when things were cool and you would definitely get scurvy, however it was more that you'd carry a gun or two for the initial assault and would then chop people up with your sharp object, because it was not really feasible to reload mid-engagement. Yup, pretty sure it was called a brace of pistols? Two pistols and a saber or boarding axe or the like. Edit: Whoops, bunch of better replies in the evidently 6 hours since I opened the tab BrotherJayne fucked around with this message at 22:47 on Jan 5, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 22:44
|
|
|
Blackbeard was said to carry "three brace" of pistol and there are tons of accounts of him just pulling out gun after gun, especially in his last stand, but he may have been an outlier, a pistols Georg. Also I'm familiar with brace from LOTR, when Sam was always going on about a brace of coneys.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 22:51
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:Arrow shafts were from coppiced wood, which grows very straight. I imagine they did not do much turning of wood and instead rejected insufficiently straight shafts, but that's conjecture on my part. but were they each a full stick, or did they rive multiple shafts out of larger stems and then round them off with a draw knife at the shave horse? Each process would have its advantage in terms of work flow, and unless bark is being left on the sticks, neither is something that's extremely quick. My suspicion after having thought about this for a while is that 10 fletchers keep lots of prepped materials laying around and probably have apprentices doing drudge work. The pace is still impressive.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 23:23
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:Arrow shafts were from coppiced wood, which grows very straight. I imagine they did not do much turning of wood and instead rejected insufficiently straight shafts, but that's conjecture on my part. You can make a wood lathe pretty easily -- check out pole lathes sometime. Definitely something that they could have built back in the day, but of course that doesn't mean they actually did.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 23:43
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:
A not insignificant issue with guns like this was if they hosed up and a spark got into the powder somehow, the magazine would blow apart and you'd lose your hand or die. EDIT: someone said it already. I think even cooler was air powered rifles, which were actually fairly common in the flintlock era. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girardoni_air_rifle Anyway yeah there was all sorts of wacky poo poo out there.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2023 23:49
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:Really just about anything metal would have been scooped up and recycled after the fact (either by the winning side or locals) right? If only because it was so good damned expensive to produce in the first place. Anything large and metal for sure, but it may not have been worthwhile to go digging for arrowheads. Fabric was very precious and people would often strip the dead and dying of their clothing. zoux posted:Blackbeard was said to carry "three brace" of pistol and there are tons of accounts of him just pulling out gun after gun, especially in his last stand, but he may have been an outlier, a pistols Georg. Hey Guns described some 17th-century cavalrymen carrying eight pistols. A pair of holsters on the shoulders, side, hip, and saddle. (On a side note, I love that "Georg" is coming to be a synonym for "outlier")
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 00:05
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:
You're probably right that fouling and cost was the main reason they weren't used. Supposedly that system did have the possibility of an explosion due to the fact that hot surfaces are in contact with the magazine. I have no idea how likely that is though, and I I think even the small caution of waiting a few seconds after firing would mitigate most of the risk. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalthoff_repeater Wikipedia has a good example of the much more complicated Kaltoff system, where there is an entirely separate piece that gets the powder, and then drops it into the chamber, and then rotates away (so it has no possibility of ever having a hot ember in it). It is even more complicated though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 00:08
|
|
|
I think I would simply hire someone to follow me around handing me additional loaded pistols.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 00:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 13:43 |
|
|
CommonShore posted:but were they each a full stick, or did they rive multiple shafts out of larger stems and then round them off with a draw knife at the shave horse? Each process would have its advantage in terms of work flow, and unless bark is being left on the sticks, neither is something that's extremely quick. It's a good question. My wood experience (lol) is mainly firewood and light logging poo poo so I don't know much about the craft side of it, but I'd assume that you make arrow shafts out of seasoned wood. If you were using single sticks, you could let them dry and debark them once dry fairly easily. I'm sure someone has done some experimental archaeology around this.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2023 01:23
|
|