h a l f b a k e r yBunned. James Bunned.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, best, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
The chivalry of crossbows is
questionable, but they are more
portable than longbows. In
order to retain their chivalrous
qualities but enhance their
portability, longbows could be
constructed with telescopic
limbs opening out from the grip,
around which the string wraps.
The arrows
are also telescopic.
(Why is there no category for
"weapon:bow"?)
I will meet you on the field of battle with my bows
http://www.istockph...1_bunch_of_bows.jpg
[normzone, Oct 02 2008]
And my army with our bows!
http://wotan.liu.ed...ytiffany/bowing.jpg
Please! [rcarty, Oct 02 2008]
This crossbow is pretty compact
http://www.popsci.c...s/getsmart_ss_3.jpg
[rcarty, Oct 02 2008]
Compound Bow
http://en.wikipedia...g/wiki/Compound_bow
Modern, Compact and Compound [csea, Oct 02 2008]
[link]
|
| |
//Why is there no category for "weapon:bow"?//
For the same reason there is no category "weapon:scrape"? |
|
| |
I was wondering how you were going to
hold that telescope steady. |
|
| |
(It might be easier to hinge the longbow
into thirds) |
|
| |
There are sprung pegs which slot into holes in the sections. |
|
| |
Would be good for survival applications. [+] |
|
| |
If each section 'telescoped' under resistance, that would indeed increase potential energy. |
|
| |
Erm, a longbow with the string off is basically a straight stick . . . six feet long, maybe, but a stick. A crossbow is a cross, with a hard-to-remove string, a trigger, a sight, a cocking mechanism, a groove, a stock and a lot of volume. |
|
| |
I issue a challenge to you, your huge army against mine, with weapons limited to one cartload of bows. I take the cart of longbows, you get the cart of crossbows. |
|
| |
Back on topic: How, half-of-exactly, do you propose to make the telescoping limbs? |
|
| |
I'd like to see a bow constructed this way that yielded more than about ten pounds draw weight. |
|
| |
arbalest... and why telescoping (except for obvious coolness factor); just swivel or detach the bow section. |
|
| |
why can't you have one lens mounted on the bow, the other on the pulling hand (i'm sure someone will tell me the technical terms of this). two Lenses could provide magnification and have cross hairs for alignment. fitting pieces to hand/bows could allow for adjustment to suit the archer's pulling stroke. muscle memory returns hand to same poiisition each shot. viola! improved accuracy. |
|
| |
[baconbrain] are you saying that the long bow is a stronger weapon than the cross bow? |
|
| |
No, I was just saying that you could fit a lot more long bows into any space that was long enough to hold them. I've owned a crossbow, and it was a pain to pack--shorter, yes, but annoying as hell. |
|
| |
For a discussion of the advantages of each in a fictional setting, I recommend the _Archer's_Tale_ books by Bernard Cornwell. (Heck, I recommend all books by Bernard Cornwell.) |
|
| |
Telescopic lenses on a bow would be all but useless. The velocity of the arrow is pretty low (around 300ft/sec from memory) so you have to factor in a fairly steep trajectory. Different with a powerful crossbow... much flatter. |
|
| |
The biggest disadvantage with a longbow is the need to sustain maximum draw weight at full stretch while you aim. Compound bows (bowhunters use them, pulleys give better leverage and elliptical axle placement of pulleys reduces hold weight) do it better. The other disadvantage of the longbow is the length of the bow limbs necessary to allow an archer to pull a heavy bow, which the Chinese addressed when they developed the recurve bow (as you see archers use in competition). |
|
| |
Compound bows are far more compact, easier to aim and more powerful than either recurve bows or longbows. |
|
| |
Telescopic arrows are going to be a problem, as the arrow shaft needs to withstand a lot of force from the nock end (rear) when you first fire it and a lot of force at the pile end (point) when it strikes the target. Even if you could make them work, the weight distribution dynamics would ruin accuracy. They already undergo some freaky physics in the early sector of their flight, especially if the stiffness of the arrow shaft is not quite enough for the bow strength. |
|
| |
If you hadn't noticed, the art and science of Archery made a significant improvement in the late 1960s - see [link]. |
|
| |
I wonder if you could make a crossbow that folds like an umbrella? That might even be the cocking method. Similar idea for a bow. I don't think telescopic is possible but with some space age crazy strong materials for a center hinge and mechanism.... |
|
| |
//retain their chivalrous qualities// |
|
| |
Bows, long, cross or otherwise were never considered chivalrous - just ask a Frenchman. |
|
| |
Yes, chivalry and the use of bows is a reach. But this idea did remind me of the captain's staff from "Andromeda", which was telescopic and very cool. At the time I thought the staff could be made using sealed telescopic sections and a high pressure gas source in an end to "inflate" it. A similar system could be used to get the desired result if you allow me to apply insane amounts of technology to an archaic problem, you cound inflate a bow shaped balloon made of graphine or kevlar over latex with 2200 psi nitrogen. Then when you are done, just deflate it, roll it up and put it in your pocket. |
|
| |
If its portability would present other issues like uneven stress distribution, additional weight of reinforcements, toughness of mating surfaces, and reliability of locking mechanisms, why not make it more functional as it is now more complicated? |
|
| |
So, to catapult an arrow forward with the least brawn but with massive force, it probably just take an archer to simply aim and pull a trigger to release a rush of compressed or combustion gas in a following set-up: the retracted telescoping bow held in the middle by the archer with an aimed arrow resting at one side suddenly extended outward by the expanding gas inside the telescoping cylinders with the consequent tightening of the string suddenly push the arrow by its rear end towards the target. |
|
| |
Simply amazing! (Although this is least chivalrous to an enemy target.) |
|
| |
There are two-piece long bows called
"take down" bows. |
|
| |
Out of that mother of new weapons sprung a bunch of diverse shock-and-awe weapon class and its compound forms. For example: |
|
| |
1. a quick thrusting concealed spear/bow |
|
| |
2. a thrusting-upon-impact spear |
|
| |
3. a variable-lengthening pole/spear |
|
| |
4. a backup concealed blade/sword |
|
| |
5. a double-hit spear/blade |
|
| |
6. a quick nunchaku-transforming stick |
|
| |
UB spotted it, the strength and flexibility issue. There's still no doubt it's cool, and on that strength, bun. |
|
| |
I like the idea... I simply doubt it would be possible, even using the best technology available. Composite materials technology has come a long way since I bought a laminated timber and fibreglass compound bow thirty years ago but it's still not up to the idea as worded. |
|
| |
The forces involved are just too great for it to work. |
|
| |
How 'bout an extendible I beam design for rigidity? |
|
| |
Leverage on each of the joints is still gonna kill it, unless there is a large overlap between sections. The compressive action of the string, on the limbs, will also need you to imnplement a positive locking mechanism at every joint. If you don't then it will just telescope back into itself and the string will go slack. |
|
| |