+- RomanArmyTalk (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat)
+-- Forum: Research Arena (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Roman Military History & Archaeology (https://www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Thread: Field Artillery (/showthread.php?tid=9953)
Carroballista update - P. Clodius Secundus - 11-20-2007
Greetings to all my fellow "UnCivil Engineers",
Now that the prototype base is finished, I've been working on a cheap and easy way to make a ratchet/winch system for the Carroballista. A couple of trips to Home Depot, twenty bucks worth of hardware, and a lot of head scratching later, and I've got a working prototype nearly done. I've modeled the design on the two-lever round ratchet system on the Cupid Gem and Legio XXIV's engine. The levers resemble Alan Wilkins cheiroballista. The ratchet washers are pretty close to the one among all the washers in Duncan's Greek & Roman Artillery. The mechanical bits are black iron, but when AuxArcher gets his furnace working I'd like to use them as a mold to cast them in bronze. As ususal each question I answer leads to a dozen more. I'll try to post some photos if anyone is interested.
Regards
Re: Field Artillery - Gaius Julius Caesar - 11-20-2007
Make it so, .... :lol: 8)
Carchesion/Winch - P. Clodius Secundus - 11-20-2007
I can't upload on this thread it is apparently maxed out on attachments. I'll post the photos of this winch on the "who makes artillery thread" on ReEnactment & ReConstruction. See Y'all there.
Re: Carroballista update - D B Campbell - 11-20-2007
Quote:I'll try to post some photos if anyone is interested.You bet, Randi!
Re: Field Artillery - MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS - 11-20-2007
you made a carroballista?
cool!
M.VIB.M.
Re: Field Artillery - P. Clodius Secundus - 11-20-2007
Quote:you made a carroballista?
cool!
M.VIB.M.
Well, I've made a carrus, the two-mule cart from which the carroballista derives it's name. I've also built a base for an iron framed ballista using the images of Trajan's Column, the Cupid Gem, and the Column of Marcus Aurelius as my sources. I am in the process of building the actual ballista to complete the set. All I'll have to do then is find someone to loan me a few mules and I'm off on campaign. The image I use as my avatar is my carrus with Legio XXIVs wooden framer scorpoin in it taken at Roman Days in Maryland this past June. Not really historically correct since I don't think there's any evidence of pre-100AD wooden framed euthyone type engines used in this manner. It did teach us a lot about the issues they would need to adress to make this weapons system practical. It was a lot of fun being able to fire a bolt and then displace to a new position and fire again, even if I did have to stand in for the missing mules. When finished, I hope to have a fully functional carroballista that closely resembles the available source material. Now if only I can convince the wife that we really need to buy some mules. :wink:
Re: Field Artillery - D B Campbell - 11-22-2007
Quote:Not really historically correct since I don't think there's any evidence of pre-100AD wooden framed euthyone type engines used in this manner.You're right, Randi. But an interesting exercise, nonetheless.
Quote:It was a lot of fun being able to fire a bolt and then displace to a new position and fire again, even if I did have to stand in for the missing mules.A "time and motion" study would also be interesting -- how long does it take to shoot, relocate, stabilise, reload, etc. :wink:
Re: Field Artillery - Gaius Julius Caesar - 11-22-2007
Welll, unless the enemy had counter batteries, how necessary is it.... :lol:
sorry, just kidding, it has always made me wonder how safe static artillery was back then....would need whole detachments to guard the positions I would imagine...
Re: Field Artillery - D B Campbell - 11-22-2007
That's why (imho) they're mostly tucked away safely inside towns. Or on the nearer bank of a river!
Re: Field Artillery - P. Clodius Secundus - 11-22-2007
These are the questions and tactical potentials that interest me most about the carroballista. Was it one single innovation or a number of upgrades that led to the ferro-ballista (I'm starting to like that that term since it is specific to the weapon not the system ie. cart/base/weapon) apparently replacing the traditional catapulta in such a short span of time. Did they start toying with the idea of mounted firing in the mid-late 1stC (like Rihill suggests) and then someone found a way to significantly increase the range which made it practical? Maybe it was the ability to fire stones as well as bolts? To make a modern comparison the carroballista had (for it's day mind you) the portability of a pack/mountain howitzer, the range of the Whitworth Rifles, The dual-purpose utility of the German 88, and the fire mounted/dismounted cabability of the WWI L60 Tracked Howitzer. Pretty strong superlatives I know, but the more I study this "mythical" beast, the more signs point to direct practical improvements that remind me of troop-level field modifications rather than the fancy formulaic approach of the earlier philosopher/engineers. How very Roman!
Re: Field Artillery - MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS - 11-22-2007
Well Josephus writes about the enemy in Jerusalem using artillery against the Romans but since they didnt know well how to handle the equipment it wasnt really an impact...
bit like the silly German idea to launch small rockets into the blue during the end of the war... cost them 300.000 RM, and what did they hit?
a mobile US laundrette and a few cows......
LOL
M.VIB.M.
btw just found a pic on the internet of a lead slingshot found near Alesia carrying the name Labienus!!!!
Re: Field Artillery - P. Clodius Secundus - 11-22-2007
Quote:Welll, unless the enemy had counter batteries, how necessary is it.... :lol:
sorry, just kidding, it has always made me wonder how safe static artillery was back then....would need whole detachments to guard the positions I would imagine...
Against a comparably armed adversary, especially in the civil wars, the unarmored mules would make an awfully big target. Of course in that case you could quickly dismount the weapon into a hasty field fortification and move the animals to safety in the rear. That's how 18thC light artillery operated. The low rate of fire would require that when forward deployed in the field the system would need infantry support and/or be able to un-ass the AO in a big hurry. One possible solution that I intend to investigate when my engine is done is the use of canister/grapeshot/beehive ammo. If your shield wall broke, a cloth bag full of sharp rocks or sling glandes in the face of the charging enemy might well slow them down. This and a hundred other theories will have to wait until "The Noisy Cricket" (tranlsation help please, my dear Latin scholars) is done and I can run crew drills and range-fire.
Re: Field Artillery - P. Clodius Secundus - 11-23-2007
The Ballistriarii have been quiet. Is that because all the Yanks have turkey hangovers from Thanksgiving? I just thought I'd post a quick photoshop to stir the pot on the in-swinger/out-swinger debate. :twisted: If the arch was included to make it easier to see the target why didn't they make it this way. With the center of the arch attached to the front of the stock the whole frame would have been stronger. I'm pretty sure that the Romans understood the engineering properties of the arch. :wink: Making the arch go over is only makes sense to me if the arms have to swing through the frame and you need the clearance to reach through to capture the bowstring. Opinions, comments, rebuttals anyone?