On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 23:29:03 GMT, cyclintom <
cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
On Mon Nov 25 13:41:40 2024 Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 19:32:46 GMT, cyclintom <cyclintom@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Crossbows had short and consequetly inaccurate arrows.
True for long distances. Not true over short distances.
Ever see how the arrow shank flexes and wobbles when shot from a
conventional bow? Start here and watch it flex:
<https://youtu.be/O7zewtuUM_0?t=46>
With all that flexing, it's a wonder the archer can hit the proverbial
side of a barn. A crossbow bolt is short, stiff and doesn't flex.
Therefore, it's more accurate. What a short bolt doesn't have is
range.
<https://www.crossbownation.com/threads/arrows-short-vs-long.115560/>
If you really want accuracy, you use the longest arrow possible.
No you don't. There is a sweet spot that is about a normal draw length.
The "sweat spot" is mentioned in the YouTube video. Assuming you
watched the video, it's difficult to miss. It has to do with
improving the accuracy by calculating the distance when the arrow is
directly in line with the aiming point which compensates for the arrow
flexing around the bow.
Long arrows have a lot of wind resistance that causes them to slow rapidly and the spinning and wiggling of the arrow is much slower making them run off course.
Wind resistance is not a function of weight. A heavy arrow has
exactly the same wind resistance as a light arrow. Aerodynamically,
wind resistance is also a function of the cross sectional (frontal)
area of the arrow. However, if you decide that arrows are shot in a
crosswind, then yes, a longer arrow with be more affected by such a
crosswind.
Reminder: I'm comparing the length of a crossbow bolt with the length
of an arrow, which is limited by the length of the human arm.
"How Long Should Your Arrows Be?"
<
https://archery360.com/2021/08/03/how-long-should-your-arrows-be/>
That business about the long bows from the Mary Rose having a draw of 175 lbs or whatever is pure crap. They were soaking in water for several hudred years
I think it's a fair assumption that those who characterized the arrows
knew that and compensated accordingly. As I vaguely recall, rather
than use the original bows and arrows for testing, they constructed
duplicates bows and arrows, using the original materials, dimensions,
construction methods, etc. Much like this video:
"Speed test of Mary Rose replica bows"
<
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyEc8tkGBJc>
Bow 1. English yew 125lb at 28": 1; 113J 2; 111J 3; 112J
Bow 2. Pacific yew 110lb at 30": 1; 98J 2; 101J 3; 107J
Bow 3. Swiss yew 145lb at 30": 1; 127J 2; 131J 3; 132J
Bow 4. Pacific yew 150lb at 30": 1; 120J 2; 125J 3; 130J
Bow 5. Swiss yew 160lb at 30": 1; 128J 2; 129J 3; 139J
People of that time were short and didn't have a lot of strength because they largely ate a carnivous diet.
You have everything backwards. People of the time constantly
practiced drawing a bow. As John B. mentioned, that was the law. They
were hardly weaklings and probably stronger than today's bowmen.
If you want to grow muscle, you eat muscle. That means a carnivorous
diet is preferred for becoming muscular. If you want to lose weight,
go on a vegan or vegetarian diet.
Your body will only absorb a limited amount of protein and then the rest if treated like pure calories.
Pure calories are called "heat". Your body "burns" calories which
produces energy. If you eat too much protein, the excess is stored as
fat.
I'm curious, what are "pure calories" as opposed to "impure calories"
and how does the body treat them?
Nobody was fat and nobody was really strong. Little John who was supposedly a giant, was probzbly 5'10".
I assume you've seen various portraits of Henry VIII?
<
https://www.google.com/search?num=10&q=henry+viii&udm=2>
When he was young, he was quite athletic, but that didn't last. As he
became older he became rather fat. The depiction of historical
figures in paintings tend to be idealized by the painter. There are
descriptions of Egyptian notables that in no way resembled what they
looked like in real life. This continued even into recent centuries,
where modern photographers would retouch their clients photo negatives
with a Xacto knife to help them loose some weight. Ansel Adams was
famous for retouching photos:
<
https://www.quora.com/What-kind-of-photo-editing-did-Ansel-Adams-do-on-his-photographs>
It was not beneath the dignity of the mediaeval painters to remove
fat, battle scars, small pox scars, and hereditary imperfections from
their paintings.
<
https://www.artstation.com/artwork/vb9n3Y>
"Men From Early Middle Ages Were Nearly As Tall As Modern People"
<
https://news.osu.edu/men-from-early-middle-ages-were-nearly-as-tall-as-modern-people/>
Incidentally, height may not have been beneficial to archers. The
added height meant they presented a larger and less obstructed target
to opposing archers. A added inch or two might have made a difference
in the length of the bow draw, but would probably be of no benefit if
the archer had stringy arm muscles and the arrows were of uniform
(standardized) length necessary for target practice.
7 claims total.
6 wrong and 1 (pure calories) will require decoding.
-- Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.comPO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.comBen Lomond CA 95005-0272Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
…