Todd managed to build the Triple Bow Siege Crossbow: https://youtu.be/p8HsGECKYA4https://youtu.be/8xiEcwqgPbQhttps://youtu.be/nFr2wcv4YeA
>>65364489Does it have any advantage over a normal ballista or springald?
>>65364489Why does the manikin have such a needlessly fat ass?
>>65364498It uses regular war bows used by troops, so Its easier to build, lighter and takes up way less space: https://youtu.be/yAgwV1ffqfM
>>65364508why would using several regular war bows of varying but specific weights make it easier to build, how would it work without the low friction precision machined steel pulleys he's using and is there any evidence for it using such pulleys or any mention of it being used in combat in general and its effectiveness at that in particular?
>>65364558>how would it work without the low friction precision machined steel pulleys he's usingI think he mentioned trying simple rings in a future video.
>>65364558He uses it without the pulleys at the end of one the videos (they add about 10% more velocity).
>>65364558He actually did use rings instead of pulleys in his tests in the end, and the difference was marginal compared with pulleys. Also the weights were 100 lbs on the 2 bows on the front and he has tested 80 and 90lbs on the back so far, and will be moving the last one to 100lbs also, since he has figure out how to make all three bows to flew their limbs at the same angles for maximum efficiency.So in the end to build one of these triple bow siege crossbows you just need 3 warbows of the same weight, a long string and some rings and a wooden frame to hold it in place.
it's tod of tods workshop tod cutler here
>>65364558Come on dude don't you feel shamed for asking this stupid question? Three small bows is easier and cheaper than one big bow.
>>65364505For sex oc.
>>65364713>Three small bows is easier and cheaper than one big bow.not the composite bows he imitates in the video
>>65364763Those small bows already exist and mass issued to your archers vs a massive limbs for a siege engine crossbow that would most likely need tobe transported or built.
>>65364768>and mass issuednothing was mass issued and a single such bow would take a master bowyer over a year to make
>>65364768>vs a massive limbs for a siege engine crossbowdo you not know how torsion siege engines work?
>>65364799You might wanna delete that post.
>>65364799so retarded you're actually funny
>>65364799>over a yearJust how many asumptions are you making here?
>>65364799What type of bow did horse archers across all steppe cultures use throughout history if they were so difficult to mass produce then?
>>65364763Actually yes it still would be for obvious reasons. What's even your reasoning here?
>>65364768>Those small bows already existyes>mass issued to your archersAbsolutely not>>65364871>What type of bow did horse archers across all steppe cultures use throughout historyComposite recurve bows.>if they were so difficult to mass produce then?They were difficult to mass produce. They cost significantly more than say, a longbow for that exact reason. Just like you know, horses. Those are expensive too. What even is this argument? Do you think steppe horsemen, whose life absolutely required they use weapons and be proficient with them, were incapable or unwilling to buy expensive things?>>65364907What obvious reasoning? Making one simple large bow is actually rather easy. It is no harder than making a longbow. The real problem is you will run into severe diminishing returns and the mechanical limits of wooden limbs.
>>65364948>It is no harder than making a longbow.>Just make a self bow out of an entire tree trunk bro!Are you retarded? Actually don't bother answering, it's clear that you are.
>>65364953>Just make a self bow out of an entire tree trunk bro!Yes, that's literally right.How do you think a bow is made in the first place? Protip, it already starts with the whole fucking tree trunk. You have to do LESS work to make a larger bow, not more.
>>65364958
>>65364965It's clear you've never made a bow. You have no idea what you're talking about.>uhm obviously making smaller things is easier because it uses less material!is the exact opposite of how this works.
>>65364948>Excavated records from the Han dynasty, such as the famous administrative inventories found in Donghai Commandery, detail a regional stockpile containing 537,707 crossbows with 11,458,424 bolts, alongside 77,521 bows and 1,199,316 arrows.Chinese crossbows were literally composite bows mounted on a wooden stock btw
>>65364489
>>65364971>Excavated records from the Han dynastylol, lmao even
>>65364825>>65364829>>65364830>>65364871>>65364907feerings of chinese people status?
>>65364980Yeah, and the most fascinanting thing is that they literally replaced spears with swordstaffs, with more than 450k of them in that armory. So the armies from the Han Dynasty were mostly composed of crossbowmen and melee troops armed with swordstaffs. I don't know of any other culture in history that has replaced their spears with swordstaffs.
>>65364994>with more than 450k of them in that armorymay i see them?
>>65364971this is fantastic if you are a soldier in the Qin dynasty. Also, by "excavated records" they do not mean they actually excavated and found any of these items, but rather literally excavated what is supposedly a written inventory list. Like most everything Chinese, it should be taken with a boulder sized grain of salt.
>>65364994>I don't know of any other culture in history that has replaced their spears with swordstaffs.The swedes seem to have done that but the problem is that we don't have any surviving examples of them, only drawings
>>65365005
>>65364994>I don't know of any other culture in history that has replaced their spears with swordstaffs.The Euros went through a phase of using shortened pikes during the 17th century, between phasing out pikes in favour of even more light infantry and the introduction of socket bayonets. Those had about the same overall length as these staff swords.But actually giving two-handed swords and sabers to missile infantry remained a China-only thing.
>>65364968Actually I do. First of all you have to select a section without any defects or knots in it. Good luck doing that with a big bow (basically impossible). I could stop right there because it's flat out impossible but let's continue. You have to dry it out. Drying a normal bow stave can take years. An entire trunk? LMAO. Next you have to straighten it out. Good luck with that. While shaving down the sapwood, taking care not to nick into the grain (because it will splinter under tension), you will have to balance both limbs equally. With a big bow? Yeah right.Here's a sample cross-section of a yew trunk I got off the internet. Feel free to get your own one though. I've drawn a longbow cross-section on it at the bottom in black, and that's being generous because for the sake of argument I've assumed it's a big tree trunk hundreds of years old. Go ahead and draw on one that's three times bigger without hitting a defect. Oh, and this is a cross-section and you have to do this for the entire trunk, avoiding defects you can't see and avoiding any part of the trunk with branches (because of knots).Also, why do you think nobody has made big self-bows for their siege engines if it was so easy? There's a reason the Romans had to use torsion springs for their ballistas instead of just carving out a huge bow. Those sinew ropes are no joke to make yet they were preferred to a huge self bow.
>>65365065Good, now figure out how much you need to make a 300lbs bow.
>>65365065
>>65364498You do realise normal ballistae and springalds are Roman and medieval European weapons exclusively, right?No one else on Earth had torsion weapons. Medievals most likely couldn't even make real ballistae and only during late middle ages/renaissance got springalds going (only somewhere, remember we only know these from texts which posit shit like bent wood slapping arrows out... which is ridiculous nonsense).Chinese/Japanese/Koreans/Vietnamese never had or even heard about anything like that. They had bows, trebuchets and gunpowder. Those were their only options to make missile weapons and within those limits they came up with these triple-bed crossbows.
>>65364489luv me some Tod kino
>>65365065>why do you think nobody has made big self-bows for their siege engineshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxybeles?useskin=vector
>>65365095>Medievals most likely couldn't even make real ballistaewhy wouldn't they? there's a direct continuity from the Roman times to the Byzantine invention of the springald in the 11th century and its spread across Western Europe from the 12th century onwards.>They had bows, trebuchets and gunpowder.>trebuchetstraction trebuchets aka mangonels.>and gunpowderby the time they developed any kind of projectile throwing firearms they already had experienced being on the receiving end of mongols' counterweight trebuchets brought from West Asia and Europe.
>>65365005>haha ride inna benis :D>oh fug my heart X(
>>65364994>with more than 450k of them in that armory.I'm not trying to be an asshole but that's a fucking INSANE number. If that's two spears per soldier that's 225,000 soldiers you can equip, just from one building. Imagine if there was a fire? Imagine if some rebels stormed the place and stopped you from accessing it. That's just a completely unbelievable number for one armory, I'm gonna need a source for this
>>65364999This really perplexes me. The numbers seem utterly unbelievable, but exaggerating numbers in history books and poetry is one thing, exaggerating them on a written inventory list in a nation famous for its efficient bureaucracy is another all together.
>>65366123Figures from China are extremely suspect. Look at wikipedia regarding battles in the, for example, Three kingdoms period. They want you to believe that they housed, fed, equipped and marched armies that approached a million men.
>>65366131Well, do the numbers even exist at all, and if they do, is the source credible?
>>65366123How dare you racist asshole question the infamously pretentious, verbose and nondescript chinese accounting! You're just jealous you inferior gwailos didn't have armies with gorillion of super weapons the likes you've never seen!
>>65364505Period accurate
>>65366290>>65366236Ask the Taiwanese, they're the ones who have those records and artifacts
>>65366297did the Taiwanese make this shill thread too?
>>65366314Yes, because it's a thread about ancient China
>>65366123Well yeah numbers were usually exaggerated.
>>65366326are you really implying those spam threads are made by anyone except butthurt west Taiwanese mainlanders or their brown simps?
>>65366011That's tiny.
>>65366011>self bowSorry, I can't hear you over the sound of how retarded you are.
>>65365065Getting three times the draw weight doesn't require a three times thicker bow. Something like 1.5x increase in the size of the section already results in 3x the bending thickness.
>>65364805The ability to make torsion siege engines was lost after the fall of Rome>this is what historians actually believe
>>65366065>why wouldn't they?Because making these siege engines requires specialised knowledge and a supply chain that never existed in early medieval Europe.> there's a direct continuity from the Roman times to the Byzantine invention of the springald in the 11th century and its spread across Western Europe from the 12th century onwards.Except there is precisely no such thing and if you read medievalist discourse or contemporary accounts, you'll quickly see that hidden behind their lack of terminology are trebuchets. The ability to make torsion weapons was lost to them, the Avars brought in Asian trebs and that alongside huge crossbows not too different from what we, again, see everywhere else in the world, is the only throwing siege weapon any knight in shining armor had to deal with. Springalds appear in very limited contexts and rather late. They're used in games and movies because they're cool and iconic. But in real life, they went poof and cramming them into the Middle Ages is just your typical Victorian idiocy.>ByzantinesI agree they could have held onto the technology but once again you're on your own to realise that they existed in their own separate world and had very limited contact with what everyone knows and understands as "medieval Europe" which is not "modern definition of European continent in 500-1500CE". These guys also had the Greek fire, paddleboats, organised state bureaucracy, etc. and no single peasant or monarch in England/France/Germany ever fathomed or cared how to make those themselves. They were Christians a world over you could reasonably contact if you wanted... just like Ethiopians or Nestorians. Not the source of authority, culture or technology for the kings and castles (but no catapults the way you know them from AoE, as we've established).
>>65367096>ecause making these siege engines requires specialised knowledge and a supply chain that never existed in early medieval Europe.Byzantine empire is part of medieval Europe.>the Avars brought in Asian trebsyou will never be a real trebuchet.>nd that alongside huge crossbows not too different from what we, again, see everywhere else in the worldwhat are you even talking about.>Springalds appear in very limited contexts and rather late11th century is by no means late but cope however you must. the "limited context" cope is also a complete lie.>But in real life, they went poofwhy are you so obsessed with trying to handwave torsion siege engines out from reality? is it your inferiority complex speaking or something?>you're on your own to realise that they existed in their own separate world and had very limited contact with what everyone knows and understands as "medieval Europe"springalds spread to Western Europe from the Byzantines within a century.
>>65367467You don't understand, even though they existed in prior centuries, a lack of written references to them in later records is definitive proof they stopped existing after a particular date.
>>65364489Extremely lame and gay to test it against chainmail armor. Chainmail is trash against crossbow bolts and arrows. Try it against decent plate and see what happens.
>>65364489why is one of them backwards?
>>65369306Just in case they sneak up on you.
>>65366293Haha lombooty
