08-10-2009, 03:54 AM
On sliders. After some thought on the matter the argument seems to be divided into two sections one being were the sliders actually used or just an assumption and two, if the sliders were indeed used why?
After thinking about the power of these machines I am inclined to say that they were employed if the argument is that the block or claw and trigger assembly by itself might have sufficed. In re-creating (attempts)these machines I am not totally sure that the purpose of the machines construction may be correct.
In re-creations if the machine breaks down the loss is minimal and the machine is mostly for re-enactment purposes? There are no real consequences or loss of life involve in the breakdown unless its construction is faulty and some part explodes hurting someone.
Certainly if this is true its not readily evident in what I have seen for the machines quality on this site and others, and some truly a work of functional art.
But could they be manned all day and fired continuously with only minor adjustments necessary? Do they actually perform as historical accounts suggest they did?
In the video's I have seen of scorpions or manuballista's being fired (carried to the field on ones shoulder) for both range and accuracy at targets, I cannot really believe they were all that useful when considering the accuracy and range of long bows and powerful hand held crossbows, that when compared to re-creations performance seem lacking. I dont see the 300 yard to 1000 yard performance.
In competitive catapult or ballista building and operations, exploding machines or components are commonplace as a study of one the most popular punkin chuckin ballistas might suggest. Mista Ballista although winning events and after many years of fine tuning cannot seem to perform consistantly and breaks something (the arms mostly) on a consistant basis.
Breakage occurs when the machine is overloaded to the maximum capability (stessed to breaking point) and cannot be expected to be of much use if it requires constant maintainance between hurls.
While not sure of the exact forces created in these machines, it would be safe to say they are tremendous. When drawing back the slider, ratchets are often seen along the length of of the slider, so that as it is cocked by the hand winches it locks into place to prevent a "dry fire" but more importantly divides the tremendous stresses or pull over a large number of bronze metal teeth. One has to keep in mind that these battles might have lasted for days on end?? With a full crew compliment operating at maximum effeciancy how many times would this machine have to shoot each day?
From experience I know that for in order to it to do so day in and day out, the machine should not be operated past 80% of its max. performance capacity. In order to have the range the machines are reported to have had, they had to be considerably more stout than treatises would suggest in written formulas,ie, spring bundle size to bolt size or length.
Machines that follow these ancient formula's by the master builders or engineers have failed again and again to reproduce the historical performance reported? Because of machines with a ratcheting winch system would serve to eleminate the percieved need for the slider ratchet system brings my reasoning to a conclusion UNLESS it might have been thought prudent to incorporate a redundency system to lesson the strain on the winch system and strengthening the system as a whole...
While the reduncy system might not have been nec. on the smaller machines, the larger machines stresses and operating forces generated would demand it due to the strength or shearing capacities of the available materials the machines were constructed from. In this I might hesitate to gamble the outcome of operating a machine with questionable dependability.
Certainly the timbers used would be "green" and not have the strength seasoned wood would have unless it would be so with the smaller and more portable machinery...trusting the outcome to a single system of using the block or claw mech and trigger assembly to hold tons and tons of forces at bay without undue strain seems unlikely.
I would suggest that over time, the slider itself may have undergone change and as well to the claw and trigger assembly as the machines size increased. As one person said the weight and unwiedines of the slider sticking out the end of the machines would not have been possible without breakage or undue stress on the rest of the components.
What I have read suggest much of the "war machine" was constructed on site using the nearest wood supplies with few parts being brought to the battle, the exception being the mule powered carts carrying the "mid sized" machines which could be constructed before hand and carried into battle along with a compliment of suitable projectiles.
I apolagise for what must have been seen as a hijacking of thread, and only now realize I should have started my own. This thread seemed appropriate and fairly dormant - a lame excuse perhaps, so again apolagies. This post I hope was more on topic and is not in any way meant to dismiss the fine workmanship of the weaponry so lovingly recreated on this site by members and on any others. No disrespect intended but only a possible theory to posed questions or topic as I understood it.
After thinking about the power of these machines I am inclined to say that they were employed if the argument is that the block or claw and trigger assembly by itself might have sufficed. In re-creating (attempts)these machines I am not totally sure that the purpose of the machines construction may be correct.
In re-creations if the machine breaks down the loss is minimal and the machine is mostly for re-enactment purposes? There are no real consequences or loss of life involve in the breakdown unless its construction is faulty and some part explodes hurting someone.
Certainly if this is true its not readily evident in what I have seen for the machines quality on this site and others, and some truly a work of functional art.
But could they be manned all day and fired continuously with only minor adjustments necessary? Do they actually perform as historical accounts suggest they did?
In the video's I have seen of scorpions or manuballista's being fired (carried to the field on ones shoulder) for both range and accuracy at targets, I cannot really believe they were all that useful when considering the accuracy and range of long bows and powerful hand held crossbows, that when compared to re-creations performance seem lacking. I dont see the 300 yard to 1000 yard performance.
In competitive catapult or ballista building and operations, exploding machines or components are commonplace as a study of one the most popular punkin chuckin ballistas might suggest. Mista Ballista although winning events and after many years of fine tuning cannot seem to perform consistantly and breaks something (the arms mostly) on a consistant basis.
Breakage occurs when the machine is overloaded to the maximum capability (stessed to breaking point) and cannot be expected to be of much use if it requires constant maintainance between hurls.
While not sure of the exact forces created in these machines, it would be safe to say they are tremendous. When drawing back the slider, ratchets are often seen along the length of of the slider, so that as it is cocked by the hand winches it locks into place to prevent a "dry fire" but more importantly divides the tremendous stresses or pull over a large number of bronze metal teeth. One has to keep in mind that these battles might have lasted for days on end?? With a full crew compliment operating at maximum effeciancy how many times would this machine have to shoot each day?
From experience I know that for in order to it to do so day in and day out, the machine should not be operated past 80% of its max. performance capacity. In order to have the range the machines are reported to have had, they had to be considerably more stout than treatises would suggest in written formulas,ie, spring bundle size to bolt size or length.
Machines that follow these ancient formula's by the master builders or engineers have failed again and again to reproduce the historical performance reported? Because of machines with a ratcheting winch system would serve to eleminate the percieved need for the slider ratchet system brings my reasoning to a conclusion UNLESS it might have been thought prudent to incorporate a redundency system to lesson the strain on the winch system and strengthening the system as a whole...
While the reduncy system might not have been nec. on the smaller machines, the larger machines stresses and operating forces generated would demand it due to the strength or shearing capacities of the available materials the machines were constructed from. In this I might hesitate to gamble the outcome of operating a machine with questionable dependability.
Certainly the timbers used would be "green" and not have the strength seasoned wood would have unless it would be so with the smaller and more portable machinery...trusting the outcome to a single system of using the block or claw mech and trigger assembly to hold tons and tons of forces at bay without undue strain seems unlikely.
I would suggest that over time, the slider itself may have undergone change and as well to the claw and trigger assembly as the machines size increased. As one person said the weight and unwiedines of the slider sticking out the end of the machines would not have been possible without breakage or undue stress on the rest of the components.
What I have read suggest much of the "war machine" was constructed on site using the nearest wood supplies with few parts being brought to the battle, the exception being the mule powered carts carrying the "mid sized" machines which could be constructed before hand and carried into battle along with a compliment of suitable projectiles.
I apolagise for what must have been seen as a hijacking of thread, and only now realize I should have started my own. This thread seemed appropriate and fairly dormant - a lame excuse perhaps, so again apolagies. This post I hope was more on topic and is not in any way meant to dismiss the fine workmanship of the weaponry so lovingly recreated on this site by members and on any others. No disrespect intended but only a possible theory to posed questions or topic as I understood it.
Torsion rules! - Joel from Ham. Ont. Ca.
