Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: mechanic on March 19, 2011, 03:10:03 AM
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRAU74VMY7A
Hey all, If anyone is interested in this sort of thing check out my video.
This is probably the 50th hazel bow I've made since I was 8yo 20 years ago.
Production time probably around 10 hours all including sanding and waxing. I use a coarse/fine wood rasp and a hammer and splitting wedge. Seasoning the wood takes months, can take up to a year or so to get best results.
Can't think what else to say that isnt mentioned in the video, but if you have any questions please ask. Don't forget you can watch it in 720p HD.
cheers.
-
Do you offer any of these for sale?
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRAU74VMY7A
Hey all, If anyone is interested in this sort of thing check out my video.
This is probably the 50th hazel bow I've made since I was 8yo 20 years ago.
Production time probably around 10 hours all including sanding and waxing. I use a coarse/fine wood rasp and a hammer and splitting wedge. Seasoning the wood takes months, can take up to a year or so to get best results.
Can't think what else to say that isnt mentioned in the video, but if you have any questions please ask. Don't forget you can watch it in 720p HD.
cheers.
:aok
-
Way cool. What does seasoning the wood entail?
You don't take much time to aim. Is that due to the draw weight?
And you make your own arrows?
HONK!
Gooss
-
Way cool. What does seasoning the wood entail?
You don't take much time to aim. Is that due to the draw weight?
And you make your own arrows?
HONK!
Gooss
Most archers that use a longbow, you use the feel of the bow and the target. not so much aiming. its more about feel.
-
Really good archers don't hold to aim, they are aiming as they draw and as soon as everything comes into alignment they release. It can almost be a zen thing you visualize where you want to hit, you see it hitting that point in your head and your body just does it.
Not that I'm anywhere in Mechanic's class. :)
-
And now we know how Batfink is able to hit anything at just about any range at any angle. :D
-
very cool mechanic...takes some skill to do that....where do you find hazel wood? i don't believe i have ever seen it...
-
3:56 :noid
Have you read Robert Hardy's excellent longbow book?
-
Surely Hadoukens would be more effective? :noid
-
Pretty cool video.
You have quite the accent there, you from New Jersey?
-
Very nice Bat.
When bows are outlawed only outlaws will have bows. :D
-
Sounds like a South Central accent to me...although he's not showing his colors...... :neener:
-
Thanks for watching guys.
I may one day progress to a level where I would be happy to sell them, but currently I only do it out of love for the past time.
Seasoning the wood for hazel is very easy. I will shape the wood within a few days of cutting, then rub it with bee's wax and paint over the tips with sealing paint (model aircraft paint works). Then just leave it in a warm, dry place. Forced seasoning can be done in a few weeks if hung over a warm (not hot) radiator. This can lead to cracking though, if dried too quickly. The seasoning will keep happening as you use the bow over a few years. eventualy you will have a very tough and flexible and dry stave. I usualy don't shoot the bows untill a few weeks after cutting them and shaping, or they tend to keep the bend and lose flex.
Arrows are made with a fletching jig. I usualy buy the shafts, flights and tips seperately then build them. Sometimes I use goose feather fletching or drill and grind heads myself but honestly my results are never as good as a shop bought part. Shafts are so hard to make perfectly without a laith. So yes they are sort of homemade, but the parts are all best when bought seperately to make at home.
As BowHTR and Ghosth say, aiming is more of a 'feel' than anything else. The bow becomes an extension of your body when you are comfortable with it. I am really just an amateur who enjoys it more than depends on it.
Hazel wood grows in woodland clearings and along pathways in the UK.
AKH, that clip was filmed at 04:00am and I have no idea what that noise was, dont think it was a car. I was wondering what was coming for a second or two :)
I have not read Hardy's book. Perhaps I should.
Micky, hadoukens would certainly be more effective at close range, but more effort and less stealthy.
This outlaw's accent would be from 30 miles west of London, England!
-
That's frikkin cool fink!!!
When the car or whatever came by I flashed back to Peyton Mannings Saturday Night Live parody 'cops cops' and take off running ;) Should have nailed one of those pigeons though. Squab for dinner ;)
-
just dont tell the riding school that i was using their indoor arena at 4am :D
:noid
-
Batty, have you ever been along to a reenactment? Plenty people who make these bows for a livign and practive with them a lot. Might be worth it so you could pick up a few tips. Maybe be able to share your experience making these weapons with other people with the same passion.
Just an idea :aok
-
Robin Hood...you are an enemy of the crown! Seize him!
Cool stuff Bat!
-
Hi Bat, just wondering why you make them out of hazel and not yew? I know yew is very slow growing, are they a protected species?
-
Yes you are right Baggy, most of our woodlands are protected. Yew was used so extensively in the past that we had to start importing it to even make our own bows. There was at one point a trade stipulation that refused entry to any foriegn trade ship to an English port who did not arrive with a donation of yew logs. It is possible to buy yew logs but that kind of defeats the point of having fun for free, for me. Hazel on the other hand is widespread and often used for things like rural fencing. It also grows very quickly.
thanks for the feedback guys, Filth I will fight to the death!
Mac, that's a good advice also, thanks. I am quite pig headed and prefer to do thing my own way even if it means it takes me years to work some things out.
-
Batty, I totally understand. It just might give you ideas, things you wouldn't have tried. Maybe fletchings and that sort of thing reenactors may have an idea which you can then develop. As I said, it was just an idea to try and help out with your interest.
Great shooting by the way
-
Yessir, I totaly see the benefit. I may well do something like that if the time is right one day. Fletching are one of the most important things to get right, along with the shafts. Currently I use a load of different shaft lengths on all the different bows. To be really good I would need to have specific arrows for specific bows depending on draw length.
Just today I was distance shooting in a field with a couple of friends. Using the bow in the vid and a much smaller hunting bow. The hunting bow was a really beauty but sadly it fired it's final shot today a little over 120 yards.
(http://www.freeroleentertainment.com/DSC01441.JPG)
-
Damn, that is a sad sight to see :(
-
haha very nice. The very end piece made me laugh :P
The background sounds we peaceful :P
-
Every bow is just 1 shot away from looking like yours there Batty...... :furious
Do you even make your own bowstring?? braiding that hemp cant be interesting to say the least....... :rofl :rofl :rofl
:salute
PS: Looks like the windings were just a wee bit short!Ever consider laminating rawhide to a bow,supposed to help stop failures like you had.
-
These guys aren't that far from you Bat.
http://www.companyofholyrood.co.uk/Videos6.htm (http://www.companyofholyrood.co.uk/Videos6.htm)
-
wow thanks for finding that site, I will have to study that in the morning. I would love to try out a real yew model made by a skilled bowyer one day.
Morf, you are dead right. That bow was always going to end like that. The problem with hazel is it is not very strong so it's hard to make the bow tips thin enough. This tips gives better acceleration but with hazel they also break very quickly if cut down to the recommended 3/8in. So the concequence is the majority of failiures happen close to the handle as alot of the flex and spring is loaded there.
Sadly, that is just bailing twine for bow cord. I'm very lazy in that department! It works ok though with minimal stretch.
-
What's the max effective range of a bow like that?
-
Bah,
Pluck Yew
;)
-
hehe Dred :)
Stoney, it depends what you mean by effective.
the 85lb bow in the vid is capable of launching an arrow 150 yards. If it hit you there it would be extremely effective. The weight of the metal tips mean that a high angle shot accelerates with gravity on the downward passage of the arch. At that sort of range you would be, let us imagine, using 200 archers to fire into a rank of 200 enemy. Very effective indeed. For single shots at a single man from 150yrds; very useless without extreme skill or luck. At max range I can drop 3 arrows into a 5m circle no problem, but that is not what I would consider effective for killing single targets.
As far as target shooting is concerned I have found myself to be effective at 30m and possibly a little beyond firing at a human sized target. Someone with more strength could probably do better than me with this bow. If you wanted to go hunting with this longbow you would have to stalk your prey or make a hide (large - 8ft tall min) to wait in and get real close.
-
I used to shoot my long bow at a range where they mostly taught Olympic style shooting which uses a recurve bow, stabilizer, and sight that moved up or down depending on the distance. They would routinely outshoot me, but I think I had more fun. They shot the same target distance over and over. Meanwhile I was shooting targets from 10 to 60 meters. Didn't always hit the far targets but from 10 to 30 meters I had a fair chance to score pretty well. They always were asking how I aimed. :)
-
hehe Dred :)
Stoney, it depends what you mean by effective.
the 85lb bow in the vid is capable of launching an arrow 150 yards. If it hit you there it would be extremely effective. The weight of the metal tips mean that a high angle shot accelerates with gravity on the downward passage of the arch. At that sort of range you would be, let us imagine, using 200 archers to fire into a rank of 200 enemy. Very effective indeed. For single shots at a single man from 150yrds; very useless without extreme skill or luck. At max range I can drop 3 arrows into a 5m circle no problem, but that is not what I would consider effective for killing single targets.
As far as target shooting is concerned I have found myself to be effective at 30m and possibly a little beyond firing at a human sized target. Someone with more strength could probably do better than me with this bow. If you wanted to go hunting with this longbow you would have to stalk your prey or make a hide (large - 8ft tall min) to wait in and get real close.
Both instances are useful. I've often wondered how effective archers were in warfare that I've read about. Keegan gives us some of the best examples of actual medieval combat in "The Face of Battle" in his description of Agincourt, but I've often watched movies, even ones that tried to "get it right" and wondered just how effective massed archers could be. Do you have any idea of the ability of a bow this size and its armor penetration value (meaning standard chain mail or equivalent)?
-
That is a very good question and one I have not fully tested at all.
Medieval longbows in their peak of performance still have alot of trouble piercing the plate armour that was being developed towards the end of the medieval period. From direct fire at close range a bodkin point may or may not have killed an armoured knight. At long range a falling shot would almost certainly not, unless it hit a weak spot by the joints or face-slits, etc.
here are a few quotes from a random source that I have read recently. I cannot say how reliable the sources are.
At the siege of Abergavenny in 1182 the Welsh arrows penetrated an oak door four inches thick. They were allowed to remain there as a curiosity, and Gerald (Giraldus Cambrensis) himself saw them six years later in 1188 when he passed the castle, with the iron points just showing on the inner side of the door. A knight of William de Braose was hit by one which went through the skirt of his hauberk, his mail hose, his thigh, and then through the leather and wood of his saddle into his horse; when he swerved round, another arrow pinned him the same way by the other leg.
The longbow had a long range and high accuracy, but not both at the same time. Most of the longer range shooting mentioned in stories was not marksmanship, but rather thousands of archers launching volleys of arrows at an entire army. Longbowmen armies would aim at an area and shoot a rain of arrows hitting indiscriminately at anyone in the area, a decidedly un-chivalrous but highly effective means of combat. An archer could hit a person at 165 m (180 yards) "part of the time" and could always hit an army.
The longbow was also used against the English by their Welsh neighbours. The Welsh used the longbow mostly in a different manner than the English. In many early period English campaigns, the Welsh used the longbow in ambushes, often at point blank range that allowed their missiles to penetrate the English Knights' armour and generally do a lot of damage. One famous Welsh longbow victory was on 22 June 1402 when Owain Glyndwr fought a battle against the English at Bryn Glas. He strategically placed his longbowmen on top of a high hill, so that his longbowmen had a better range than the English longbowmen, who were overwhelmed down on the low ground. The result was a conclusive victory for the Welsh.
In a modern test, a direct hit from a steel bodkin point penetrated Damascus chain armour.[23] (Bodkin points have been described as "armour-piercing", but the latest research is that they were not made of hardened steel and were not designed for this purpose.)[24]
Even very heavy draw longbows have trouble penetrating well made, tough steel plate armour, which was used increasingly after 1350. Armour of the Medieval eras was not proof against arrows until the specialized armour of the Italian city state mercenary companies.[25] Archery was ineffective against plate armour in the Battle of Neville's Cross (1346), the siege of Bergerac (1345), and the Battle of Poitiers (1356); such armour became available to European knights of fairly modest means by the late 1300s, though never to all soldiers in any army. Strickland and Hardy suggest that "even at a range of 240 yards heavy war arrows shot from bows of poundages in the mid- to upper range possessed by the Mary Rose bows would have been capable of killing or severely wounding men equipped with armour of wrought iron. Higher-quality armour of steel would have given considerably greater protection, which accords well with the experience of Oxford's men against the elite French vanguard at Poitiers in 1356, and des Ursin's statement that the French knights of the first ranks at Agincourt, which included some of the most important (and thus best-equipped) nobles, remained comparatively unhurt by the English arrows."
I think I will do some penetration tests with this bow and post the results. It must be noted that despite my estimate of 85lbs, this relates purely to the force required to draw the bow, and not the acceleration or range of the projectile. For example, a modern composite bow of 85lbs would be vastly more powerfull than my lovingly carved stick.
-
It must be noted that despite my estimate of 85lbs, this relates purely to the force required to draw the bow, and not the acceleration or range of the projectile. For example, a modern composite bow of 85lbs would be vastly more powerfull than my lovingly carved stick.
Perhaps, but your bow is much more representative of the period bows than any compound bow manufactured today... Thanks for the post regardless. If arrows fired from a longbow could penetrate a 4-inch thick oak door, I'd think mail or thin plate would be easily penetrated. Of course, that's assuming the "4-inch thick oak door" story is true.
-
Both instances are useful. I've often wondered how effective archers were in warfare that I've read about. Keegan gives us some of the best examples of actual medieval combat in "The Face of Battle" in his description of Agincourt, but I've often watched movies, even ones that tried to "get it right" and wondered just how effective massed archers could be. Do you have any idea of the ability of a bow this size and its armor penetration value (meaning standard chain mail or equivalent)?
The longbow was the big stick on the medieval battlefield: Crécy and Poitiers being prime examples.
In the war against the Welsh, one of the men of arms was struck by an arrow shot at him by a Welshman. It went right through his thigh, high up, where it was protected inside and outside the leg by his iron cuirasses, and then through the skirt of his leather tunic; next it penetrated that part of the saddle which is called the alva or seat; and finally it lodged in his horse, driving so deep that it killed the animal.
Modern tests:
leather armour: http://www.youtube.com/user/bigbowbrum#p/u/0/tDvTXprbAO4 (http://www.youtube.com/user/bigbowbrum#p/u/0/tDvTXprbAO4)
butted chain: http://www.youtube.com/user/bigbowbrum#p/u/7/-4gPgHyaG1Q (http://www.youtube.com/user/bigbowbrum#p/u/7/-4gPgHyaG1Q)
plate: http://www.youtube.com/user/bigbowbrum#p/u/8/q-Xp56uVyxs (http://www.youtube.com/user/bigbowbrum#p/u/8/q-Xp56uVyxs)
Archers were inexpensive when compared to men-at-arms, but had to be well practiced to be effective:
"Whereas the people of our realm, rich and poor alike, were accustomed formerly in their games to practise archery – whence by God's help, it is well known that high honour and profit came to our realm, and no small advantage to ourselves in our warlike enterprises... that every man in the same country, if he be able-bodied, shall, upon holidays, make use, in his games, of bows and arrows... and so learn and practise archery."
It was the introduction of high-quality plate armour that led to the longbow becoming obsolete.
-
Interesting though, that in the Napoleonic wars, the unarmoured infantry would have suffered catastrophic losses if faced by a company of longbows. Rapid fire and stealth compared to a musket. The only problem with that idea was that the skills required had been lost with the longbows themself and no-one could use one effectively anymore. Add to that, it takes a relatively short time to train a man to fire a musket, as opposed to the years of dedication it took to train a man to be proficient with a longbow.
I am currently rendering a video of penetration of the hazel longbow. It's going to take a few hours to render and upload it to youtube. I will post it here as soon as I can.
-
Wow! Nice job BatfinkV!
I just received a new longbow a few days ago. It's a modern store-bought one though. I'm in the process of switching from right-handed to left-handed shooting. I'm left-eye dominant, but have always shot right-handed. Since I haven't shot much for the last few years, and my son is now getting started, I decided to re-teach myself. I'm a long way from re-taught so far though, lol!
When I get it figured out I'll get back to making some of my own, left-handed this time. Have you seen the pictures I've posted of mine? I also do a little knapping, and can turn out a fair stone point.
Strings- A real nice traditional string can be made from the neck skin of a snapping turtle, if you have any of those around. They still stretch if they get moist, but are easier to make than hand-twisting one from sinew.
Bummer on the broken bow, but I'm sure you know the saying "a strung wooden bow is already 9/10's broken..." They all break eventually. But then again, they do grow from trees...
-
Not many turtles over here, snapping or otherwise hehehe!
Left handed is something I have been trying to force myself to practice. I prefer to shoot right handed but I can see how lop-sided my shoulder muscles are. I hope to build up my left shoulder and right forearm equaly to their opposites. The only problem is I am too lazy to actualy 'train' and usualy am just shooting for fun (I have more fun shooting righty!) It's actualy quite natural either way once I got over the awkward stance. Thanks for the reply sir, and good luck in the switch over.
Penetration results
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGPZlsyiWlM
Not sure how much this helps concerning medieval armour. It does at least show that light protection is almost useless. I would like to find a piece of leather to test but have nothing that I want to damage.
What are your thoughts, Stoney? Or anyone interested's thoughts?
-
Not many turtles over here, snapping or otherwise hehehe!
Left handed is something I have been trying to force myself to practice. I prefer to shoot right handed but I can see how lop-sided my shoulder muscles are. I hope to build up my left shoulder and right forearm equaly to their opposites. The only problem is I am too lazy to actualy 'train' and usualy am just shooting for fun (I have more fun shooting righty!) It's actualy quite natural either way once I got over the awkward stance. Thanks for the reply sir, and good luck in the switch over.
Penetration results
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGPZlsyiWlM
Not sure how much this helps concerning medieval armour. It does at least show that light protection is almost useless. I would like to find a piece of leather to test but have nothing that I want to damage.
What are your thoughts, Stoney? Or anyone interested's thoughts?
Well, between yours and the links AKH posted, I'd say my preconceptions of their effectiveness are very understated. What I would be curious of is the difference in the "direct" fire technique shown in these videos versus the "indirect" method that massed archery would have used. Would the arrows maintain this same sort of penetration capability? If so, then holy cow! No wonder they were so feared. That's some serious firepower.
-
Interesting though, that in the Napoleonic wars, the unarmoured infantry would have suffered catastrophic losses if faced by a company of longbows. Rapid fire and stealth compared to a musket. The only problem with that idea was that the skills required had been lost with the longbows themself and no-one could use one effectively anymore. Add to that, it takes a relatively short time to train a man to fire a musket, as opposed to the years of dedication it took to train a man to be proficient with a longbow.
I am currently rendering a video of penetration of the hazel longbow. It's going to take a few hours to render and upload it to youtube. I will post it here as soon as I can.
Most people with a little training can hit a 24'' inch circle every time with a smoothbore at 50 yards. Doing the same consistently with a bow is much harder. Musket innaccuracy is actually greatly exaggerated in pop culture, actually most humans will be more accurate with them than they will be with bows. Still, one would think it wouldn't take THAT long to train men to be effective archers in large groups firing volleys.
I imagine a huge part of the equation is cost, cost of ammo (arrows) if not the bows themselves. A few years ago I figured up the cost of arrows made from bought components that I assembled myself, and it came to $2.50 apiece. Rifle cartridges are alot cheaper than that. I imagine a similar economic dynamic might have applied to lead balls and powder charges vs. arrows back in the day.
Another factor is wounding effectiveness. I'd expect a large % of those hit by an arrow in someplace other than a vital organ to live and maybe even be able to keep fighting Whereas a large caliber musket ball would likely at least cripple you wherever it struck. Arrows simply don't have much stopping power when they don't hit the heart/lungs or sever a blood vessel large enough to cause rapid bleed out.
-
English longbowmen smeared their tips in excrement. I imagine that most wounds would have been at least very serious if not fatal.
-
English longbowmen smeared their tips in excrement. I imagine that most wounds would have been at least very serious if not fatal.
Nasty! But that's at least a few hours for infection to set in though, and realistically, not much material would stay with the arrow in flight...and fibers from filthy uniforms being driven into the wounds by musket balls is probably at least as likely to cause infections.
The absolute worst vector for infection was of course the hands and instruments of physicians of this period. You had a decent chance of surviving a flesh wound IF you could successfully avoid medical treatment...
In the period before proper disinfection was fully understood, ANY wound could become serious, however, the massive damage a ball can cause starts out far more serious than an arrow wound, especially a wound from a bodkin point as opposed to a broadhead.
In hunting, double-lung penetration is considered the ideal for killing deer because it has a drowning as well as an exsanguinating effect. Wounds in other places can often lead to lost game. There is evidence that deer often recover from flesh wounds from arrows.
Although this two part article focuses on hand-held bladed weapons and not arrows, they illustrate that the stopping power of such is generally far less than most assume.
http://www.classicalfencing.com/articles/bloody.php (http://www.classicalfencing.com/articles/bloody.php)
http://www.classicalfencing.com/articles/kill2.php (http://www.classicalfencing.com/articles/kill2.php)
I think between economics and lethality, it becomes clear why bows lost out to early firearms despite their far inferior rates of fire and other disadvantages.
-
Well, between yours and the links AKH posted, I'd say my preconceptions of their effectiveness are very understated. What I would be curious of is the difference in the "direct" fire technique shown in these videos versus the "indirect" method that massed archery would have used. Would the arrows maintain this same sort of penetration capability? If so, then holy cow! No wonder they were so feared. That's some serious firepower.
No, they wouldn't, but men and horses would still go down. The closer they got to the lines, the more casualties they would suffer, until they reached a range at which their primary armour was ineffective and the real slaughter would begin.
Also, due to the greater range of the longbow, lightly armoured missile troops were unable to close to return fire without suffering significant casualties.
I imagine a huge part of the equation is cost, cost of ammo (arrows) if not the bows themselves. A few years ago I figured up the cost of arrows made from bought components that I assembled myself, and it came to $2.50 apiece. Rifle cartridges are alot cheaper than that. I imagine a similar economic dynamic might have applied to lead balls and powder charges vs. arrows back in the day.
Guns were state of the art, involving advanced technology that was both effective and highly lucrative for those with the knowledge, skill and nerve to make use of it. Bows and arrows are relatively easy to make, from what where common, inexpensive materials (but aren't now.)
Most arrows were recovered from the field after the battle. If damaged, they are easy to repair, so they can be used many times.
The warbow's demise was simply due to the facts that it was becoming increasingly ineffective and that archers had to be highly skilled.
-
On the American frontier, the bow was more effective against muzzle loading muskets and rifles than is often credited as well (although the most feared weapon on the frontier was neither; it was the tomahawk).
For one, rate of fire is about 6 times higher with a bow. I fire muzzle loaders a lot, and am pretty quick when it comes to measuring powder and loading "out of the bag". Even so, I have trouble getting an aimed shot off in less than 40 seconds.
The early militia was expected to be able to load and fire quickly, but the vast majority of Americans weren't in the militia... Against small 1-15 man groups, and using guerrilla-type warfare, that quicker rate-of-fire was an advantage.
Another advantage was stealth. Several archers could fire once or twice each and not immediately give away their position. Dropping selected members of the opposing party, they could possibly even remove several opponents before the alarm was raised. I've had the misfortune of missing several deer while hunting with a longbow or recurve. Often the arrow flight is the loudest noise (unlike those clanky new-fangled training-wheel bows). Several times I've missed a deer from the "right", and had the deer look to the left (where the arrow hit) wondering what was up. Meanwhile, with the deer facing away I nock another arrow... I've even hit deer, and had them jump toward me, and away from the arrow that passed through it and clanked against the ground on the opposite side.
The arching flight of the arrow is another advantage, when your opponents are forted-up behind a low obstacle (fallen tree or rock). Unlike a bullet, an arrow can be "lobbed" quite effectively.
Another aspect to consider is that while animals are dying due to massive blood-loss, and can take a while to do so (traveling quite some distance), people go into shock very quickly, even from minor wounds. You can die (or at least be incapacitated) from shock, even if the wound isn't fatal...
-
On the American frontier, the bow was more effective against muzzle loading muskets and rifles than is often credited as well (although the most feared weapon on the frontier was neither; it was the tomahawk).
For one, rate of fire is about 6 times higher with a bow. I fire muzzle loaders a lot, and am pretty quick when it comes to measuring powder and loading "out of the bag". Even so, I have trouble getting an aimed shot off in less than 40 seconds.
The early militia was expected to be able to load and fire quickly, but the vast majority of Americans weren't in the militia... Against small 1-15 man groups, and using guerrilla-type warfare, that quicker rate-of-fire was an advantage.
Another advantage was stealth. Several archers could fire once or twice each and not immediately give away their position. Dropping selected members of the opposing party, they could possibly even remove several opponents before the alarm was raised. I've had the misfortune of missing several deer while hunting with a longbow or recurve. Often the arrow flight is the loudest noise (unlike those clanky new-fangled training-wheel bows). Several times I've missed a deer from the "right", and had the deer look to the left (where the arrow hit) wondering what was up. Meanwhile, with the deer facing away I nock another arrow... I've even hit deer, and had them jump toward me, and away from the arrow that passed through it and clanked against the ground on the opposite side.
The arching flight of the arrow is another advantage, when your opponents are forted-up behind a low obstacle (fallen tree or rock). Unlike a bullet, an arrow can be "lobbed" quite effectively.
Another aspect to consider is that while animals are dying due to massive blood-loss, and can take a while to do so (traveling quite some distance), people go into shock very quickly, even from minor wounds. You can die (or at least be incapacitated) from shock, even if the wound isn't fatal...
-
On the American frontier, the bow was more effective against muzzle loading muskets and rifles than is often credited as well (although the most feared weapon on the frontier was neither; it was the tomahawk).
For one, rate of fire is about 6 times higher with a bow. I fire muzzle loaders a lot, and am pretty quick when it comes to measuring powder and loading "out of the bag". Even so, I have trouble getting an aimed shot off in less than 40 seconds.
The early militia was expected to be able to load and fire quickly, but the vast majority of Americans weren't in the militia... Against small 1-15 man groups, and using guerrilla-type warfare, that quicker rate-of-fire was an advantage.
Another advantage was stealth. Several archers could fire once or twice each and not immediately give away their position. Dropping selected members of the opposing party, they could possibly even remove several opponents before the alarm was raised. I've had the misfortune of missing several deer while hunting with a longbow or recurve. Often the arrow flight is the loudest noise (unlike those clanky new-fangled training-wheel bows). Several times I've missed a deer from the "right", and had the deer look to the left (where the arrow hit) wondering what was up. Meanwhile, with the deer facing away I nock another arrow... I've even hit deer, and had them jump toward me, and away from the arrow that passed through it and clanked against the ground on the opposite side.
The arching flight of the arrow is another advantage, when your opponents are forted-up behind a low obstacle (fallen tree or rock). Unlike a bullet, an arrow can be "lobbed" quite effectively.
Another aspect to consider is that while animals are dying due to massive blood-loss, and can take a while to do so (traveling quite some distance), people go into shock very quickly, even from minor wounds. You can die (or at least be incapacitated) from shock, even if the wound isn't fatal...
-
Very interesting points raised by everyone. Great debate to read, thank you for all the good info everyone. I'm very interested in both the bow as a weapona nd the developement of firearms through history.
-
Batty,
Just finished watching your penetration vid,nice use of the mirror!! I think that the galvanized steel you used is abit light to represent armour,maybe it's close to the plate thickness but they had mail and leather under that too!
Now I noticed a 45gallon drum in the riding ring,that would,IMHO be a better target. If you could get the arrow the penetrate that it would most likely prove that the longbow could indeed stop an armoured combatant.
The excrement part wasnt to be mentioned Batty{you'll be reprimanded in due time},the biological weapons treaty wasnt signed for several years after this offence,but we still dont want that to be public knowledge..... :noid
:rofl :rofl :rofl
:salute
-
Another aspect to consider is that while animals are dying due to massive blood-loss, and can take a while to do so (traveling quite some distance), people go into shock very quickly, even from minor wounds. You can die (or at least be incapacitated) from shock, even if the wound isn't fatal...
Sometimes they do, and sometimes they don't.
-
Batty,
Just finished watching your penetration vid,nice use of the mirror!! I think that the galvanized steel you used is abit light to represent armour,maybe it's close to the plate thickness but they had mail and leather under that too!
Now I noticed a 45gallon drum in the riding ring,that would,IMHO be a better target. If you could get the arrow the penetrate that it would most likely prove that the longbow could indeed stop an armoured combatant.
The excrement part wasnt to be mentioned Batty{you'll be reprimanded in due time},the biological weapons treaty wasnt signed for several years after this offence,but we still dont want that to be public knowledge.....
hehehe! Even without the bio-weap technology the archers would often stick their arrows in the ground infront of them, which could also lead to infection.
Yes you are right, those two lump of steel were all I could find at the time. I will make a 4" bodkin and test it on that steel drum when I get a chance.
-
I imagine a huge part of the equation is cost, cost of ammo (arrows) if not the bows themselves. A few years ago I figured up the cost of arrows made from bought components that I assembled myself, and it came to $2.50 apiece. Rifle cartridges are alot cheaper than that. I imagine a similar economic dynamic might have applied to lead balls and powder charges vs. arrows back in the day.
It would have, but in reverse.
When you look at the bow in history, it's use in England was (er, is) just a teency weency piece of its history and use across the globe. Depending on which data you choose to believe, the bow has been around for at least 7000 or possibly as long as 30,000 years. Laminated/layered/composite bows have been around for at least 4000 years. The materials and knowledge required to make bows were literally "everywhere" and available for everyone. Bows and arrows literally grow on trees. In reality, the bow is the easy part. A great bow is nothing without good arrows. Good arrows will fly pretty good out of a cruddy bow, though. Making good arrows is more difficult than making a good bow.
The poorest people in the world have always had access to archery equipment, because they can pick the materials up off the ground and make the equipment themselves. As a matter of fact, people that needed bows often had one they were using, a spare one, and several staves curing so they could be turned into bows as they needed them. They were "free" after all, as well as being necessary for survival...
Medieval England throws some complications into the equation, because now there's division of class, ownership of resources, etc.. But then again, every able-bodied male was expected to own, be proficient with, and practice daily with his bow at one point.
On the other hand, powder and lead aren't as easy to find. And even if the materials are readily at hand, it requires special knowledge (which was often kept "secret") to turn charcoal, sulfur, and potassium nitrate into a reliable, powerful, powder. Those materials and knowledge were much more costly. Supply and demand factors in here. The demand for powder and lead eventually got high while the overall supply was low, driving the price up, while the supplies for archery equipment were high with a lower demand which kept prices low.
And again, the firearms themselves took special non-readily-available materials, knowledge, and skill, to create. That translates to an expensive firearm, using expensive powder and possibly expensive lead. Even if the lead is "cheap", it's not as cheap or readily available as dogwood saplings and chert (arrows).
The lead was a mined resource that wasn't available to everyone locally, so had to be transported, traded for, purchased, etc... It wasn't cheap. Sulfur was the same. Potassium Nitrate was often leached from animal or human waste (again, using a technique that wasn't known by everyone).
Maintenance too... Once a firearm is procured, it still requires a specially-trained person to make repairs or replacement parts (which in almost every case were "custom" parts, since it was pre- industrial revolution). Firearms were made one at a time by an individual in a blacksmith shop. If he needed a screw, he made one from scratch. If he needed a trigger, he made one from scratch. If he needed a barrel, he made one from scratch. Even if he made several barrels at the same time they weren't identical... Firearms were what we think of as "custom made" and expensive.
Prices of "a few years ago" for store-bought archery supplies cannot even remotely be compared to what they've been in history. First of all, those items likely weren't available for purchase for the most part, since they were readily available for everyone and nobody wanted to pay for them. 100 years ago, people didn't go to the store and buy sticks so they could make arrows. And again, supply and demand kicks in, but this time in reverse... Nowadays, powder and lead are cheap, whereas archery equipment is more of a rarity or specialty. Archery equipment is more expensive (by far) than it's been in the past, while firearms and bullets are far cheaper than they've been in the past.
-
hehehe! Even without the bio-weap technology the archers would often stick their arrows in the ground infront of them, which could also lead to infection.
Yes you are right, those two lump of steel were all I could find at the time. I will make a 4" bodkin and test it on that steel drum when I get a chance.
I wouldn't be surprised to see it bounce off of a drum.
I suspect the metallurgy of the drum is significantly better/different than medieval armor, although I've never looked into it. I'm confident that most of the steel I use for making things in my blacksmith forge is too soft to make decent points out of, let alone points to penetrate steel. The drum itself would make better points, with its higher carbon content.
I'm still curious to see what it'll do though. I fired my .75 musket at the side of a steel drum from almost 100 yards. The ball penetrated the drum and went 'round and 'round inside, making a hellaciously cool noise, lol!
-
hah! That would be very cool to hear, I can imagine how it would sound.
-
hah! That would be very cool to hear, I can imagine how it would sound.
Well now, truth be told it scared the piss outta me at first.
I was expecting to hear the impact, but the next three seconds or so of noise I wasn't expecting! I didn't know what the noise was, and was worried I'd ricocheted and hit something I shouldn't have. I was also concerned that whatever I'd hit was doing something "odd" that I was going to get into trouble about.
It turned from a "scary as chit" noise into a "hellaciously cool" noise a few minutes later, when I figured out what had happened.
I'm still having trouble wrapping my head around something I saw in your penetration test movie. Were you actually trying to touch that cat??? Bare-handed? Gross...
-
ahahaha....I was trying to get the little bugger out of the firing range, but she was too quick for me.
don't worry I had a leather glove on.
-
I made a 25 min, 2-part instructional video on how I make a hazel bow.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCnGMup29OU - part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=creV06I-4us - part 2
-
I wouldn't be surprised to see it bounce off of a drum.
I suspect the metallurgy of the drum is significantly better/different than medieval armor, although I've never looked into it. I'm confident that most of the steel I use for making things in my blacksmith forge is too soft to make decent points out of, let alone points to penetrate steel. The drum itself would make better points, with its higher carbon content.
Yes I suspect the same thing Mtnman,however if it can pierce the drum even slightly it would give us a much better idea of the penetration thats possible.
IIRC they made different points and different arrows,points for hunting,target and the deadly war bodkins.I would suspect they would use a heavier and or longer arrow for war also.The added weight or the war point and arrow would have a higher impact force,sort of like getting hit by a heavyweight boxer compared to a middleweight.
I've always been fascinated with medieval weapons,been thinking about a water ballon trebuchet to amuse the grandson with!
:salute
-
I tested a half inch bodkins tyle point on the steel drum, Morf.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnYHorXQRGE
what do you think?
-
I tested a half inch bodkins tyle point on the steel drum, Morf.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnYHorXQRGE
what do you think?
Pretty impressive!
Hazel is a wood I've never played with. What kind of properties are you finding with it? Is it faster/slower than other woods you've used (at a comparative draw length and weight)? Does it have any string-following tendencies so far?
-
Ah great stuff Batty,not sure why the french though,whats a seal got to do with this anyways.... :rofl :rofl
I've used those same points way back when,I think they're called a field point as you can use them for target and or small game! Certainly nothing like a real war bodkin but the results were more than impressive.
You've got a good eye,that looked like a 2 inch group at what 24 to 30 ft?? Very nice!!
Makes you understand why they cut the fingers off the archers,all that money spent on armour and some peasent with a bow defeats it....... :furious I've heard thats where the 2 finger V for victory came from,the Archers tauntingly held up their 2 fingers to show they still had them!
Add some biological additives to the points and a mere scratch was deadly. BTW Batty,the morphine would just prolong the agony,best finish the deed and save the meds for a good party afterwards....... :rofl
:salute
-
Hazel is limited by strength. It has no real definition between sap and heart. The only way to make a strong leading edge is to leave it alone IE bark still on, or just bark shaved neatly and no damage to the outer skin. The belly is less critical but if you go much deeper than the center it loses all its rebound spring and becomes more spongey. The other main limitation is the weakness when making the tips. Thin tips give better acceleration but hazel wont allow tips as thin as I would like.
I have no real experience with other woods. Ash I have tried once but it snapped in half after a marathon building session and put me off bow making for a while at all. I would like to get hold of some sinew and some horn to really make a deflex/reflex hazel bow that holds it's shape. That 85lb longbow I showed is almost certainly the most powerfull and dangerous bow I have ever made.
The two finger salute does indeed come from that time. The French were still the most powerfull medieval force for much of that time period. They had money, resources, armours and the courage to fight like no others in Europe.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3tNrX-gVuQ - archer anatomy
At the risk of being called a skrawny english fool :-) This quick clip shows the difference in strain on the back muscles between pulling a very light bow around 30-40lbs and pulling the 85lb longbow. Just incase people thought it looked too easy. I think I am quite a good example of what a young medieval archer would be built like. I never do any weight training and am only toned due to actualy activity. you can see the lopsided nature of the muscles that have developed over time from actualy doing the task intended for them.
-
I know this is now becoming on obscessive self posting but I promise this will be the last one :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LMsY1Nk58Hw
Making of The Beast: This is almost certainly going to be more powerfull than the 85 pounder. Alot more powerfull.
-
I know this is now becoming on obscessive self posting but I promise this will be the last one :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LMsY1Nk58Hw
Making of The Beast: This is almost certainly going to be more powerfull than the 85 pounder. Alot more powerfull.
That is one SEXY bow! Nice to see how they're made, I found it quite enjoyable.
I watched it twice, to be honest... Once in the original state, the second time
with the weird 1911 filter. It so goes with your sanding along with the music :D
-
:rofl 1911 style was totaly awesome. It really fits.
Thanks for the encouragement sir!
-
1911 style :rofl
-
Watch the vid Batty,you need to make a frow to split that wood and spot treating that plane iron like that! :lol
I'd cry if you did that to my footprint plane.... find an old lawnmower blade and take it to a grinder and you can beat on that all day long. I'm surprized you dont use a stringing frame but the vice seems to work well. Do you string it like that to equal out the limbs? Oh and do you really just use a rasp and sandpaper? ever tried a spoke shave?
:salute
-
It's my plane blade and I like using it :D It's got a nice flat spot on top where i've been hitting it by now.
I think they call the stringing frame a tiller. I just use my method as I'm lazy and yup it is to see how the bow curves and even out the arms.
Yessir I just use the rasp, plane blade and sand paper. It takes alot of effort but I see it as good excersize. Believe it or not, the sanding is the most annoying and energy sapping. I finish it all off with bee's wax polish from a tin. The belly of the bow is now as smooth as silk. In a week or so it will have dried out and be ready for some testing. If I fire it too much now it will permanetly bend and lose power.
I snuck in a quick test this morning with 'The Beast' and punctured a hole in an old car panel resting against the manure pile.
Thanks again guys for the encouragement and interest. It really is something I love to do.
-
I know, I know, I promised I would not post anymore videos... :o
Here is me weighing the estimated 85lb hazel bow.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hu4afVp0f-c
90lb @ 28"
I also worked out the speed. Approx. 164 feet/second over 30 meters.
:bolt: