S
Sombrero
Sooey calm down...
so why throw a rock? in a slingshot?
my point is, rather than rip up a sock, why not break a branch off an ash tree and tie a bit of string to it?
Sooey calm down...
so why throw a rock? in a slingshot?
my point is, rather than rip up a sock, why not break a branch off an ash tree and tie a bit of string to it?
One thing that boils my pizz (apart from people who don't like football and never miss the opportunity to say, as though they're on some sort of evangelical mission) is people who tell others to calm down when they are already perfectly sanguine. Or were, until some bell end told them to fckin calm down.
S
Sombrero
Maybe you should calm down a bit then sooey, or at least respect other posters WHO HAVE DONE NOTHING WRONG - whoops, caps lock attack, sorry !
Can we talk about rock throwing versus rudimentary bow making? perchance?
That paranoia of yours is popping up again martian.
You continue to see every post which doesn't completely agree with you as some kind of personal attack.
You're not back on that lotion are you?
S
Sombrero
No i'm fine, you're the one with boiled pizz, not me !!!!!
I just want to understand why throwing rocks is better that forming a bow...
Are we still buddies now you've calmed down a bit ;o)
We are talking about places like Syria here aren't we, with government troops armed with modern weapons?
Make as many bows as you like, it won't do any good.
Make as many bows as you like, it won't do any good.
S
Sombrero
With the greatest of respect, my question is around a photo in last Sunday's papers with a guy in a war zone showing his displeasure with a slingshot.... my question, from 4 pages ago, is why don't you see a bow and arrow thing ever in news reels? are they nowhere near as good as throwing a rock?
Sooey, you are a great poster, but you've jumped on the abuse train, and had your pizz boiled... remembered that you hate people from mars and eventually listened to the question...
Happy days !!
You're perfectly correct. Not only would a bow and arrows be more lethal than throwing a rock, it would also have a much longer range and be more accurate.
As for energy, I'm not sure. I reckon the bows I am making are in the region of 50 pounds draw weight. Only speaking for myself, of course, but I think I expend more energy drawing the bows than I would in throwing a rock. Then again, I suppose a rock would weigh more than an arrow, so the rock loses on two counts! It's all a matter of application of energy input.
Probably because making a bow is a tad more than "breaking a branch of a tree and tieing a bit of string to it". It's a lot of effort to do in a short time, probably better to spend that time and energy trying to aquire better weapons. Now a rock albeit with it's limitations is readily available and requires no work to be used immediately, plus you don't even have to conceal it , they are just lieing around everywhere.
Oh and just to give you a little more "information" there are accounts of bodkin headed arrows being able to pierce woven kevlar body armour not that I've tried it mind. So maybe , just maybe, they should ditch their rocks and get a bow.
Oh and just to give you a little more "information" there are accounts of bodkin headed arrows being able to pierce woven kevlar body armour not that I've tried it mind. So maybe , just maybe, they should ditch their rocks and get a bow.
I suppose it's to do with 'rules of engagement'. The police are restricted in what they may do depending on the degree of danger. If a 'protester' were to bring out a bow and start shooting arrows at the police, I think that might result in the police using firearms to defend themselves and remove the danger to themselves and the public.
Rocks, though, seem to be acceptable. All they are allowed to do is defend themselves with plastic shields, and it's the same when molotov cocktails are thrown too. Personally, I think it only fair that the police should be allowed to respond in kind: throw rocks and petrol bombs!
- Joined
- 19 Nov 2012
- Messages
- 255
- Reaction score
- 25
- Country
Rocks are effective. We were beseiged in a police station in Iraq for days as the locals rained rocks down on us. From a range of about a 100 yards hundreds of people raining rocks down on you is pretty lethal.
J
joinerjohn
I thought that was a popular saying in Liverpool,,, "Calm down, calm down.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6k2YEc6dozA
So bow vs crossbow if we are assuming a make believe uprising.... ok.....
Making a bow is probably very easy, making a good bow.....not so much, but then some people will struggle to hit a target at 50 yards with a longbow, about 20 people at my club shoot longbow, most of them for a few years (most of them shoot Wednesday night & Sunday).
Out of 6 shots at 50 yards, not all of them will get 6/6 shots hitting the target (1.2m wide), the good ones might get 2/6 in the bullseye (20cm???).
Now that's at 50 yards, some nights the longbow shooters shoot 100 yards, they take up too much time looking for their arrows (when an arrow misses a target it ends up in the ground, sometimes you need a metal detector to find it).
Shooting a longbow consistently (as in hitting targets) is hard, and takes a lot of practice, the bows also change properties under different temp/humidities.
Now I hope this paints a picture, who cares if the bow isn't that good and only shots a hundred yards at best, that's still triple what most people picking one up are going to be able to shoot accurately at (beginners will often miss a target at 20 yards for the first 4 lessons or so).
To put it in context, after about 10 sessions with a recurve, I can hit the bullseye (not just hit the target) at 50 yards, most times.
The difference is that a longbows accuracy comes completely from the persons muscles, their ability to develop muscle memory, hold it steady, draw to a consistent pull (imagine pulling backwards 50lb of pressure, and pulling it to *exactly* the same spot next to your cheek each time). The reason recurves are much easier is a whole number of attachments to help with this, sights, grips, slings, stabilizers.
Now take a crossbow.
The power of the bolt is not dependant upon muscle, but metal, and it will shoot with the same power each time, the same arc, the same speed, this means it is extremely easy to learn where it shoots and so readily attach or use a sight, if you make a crossbow with a sight (which could just be a matchstick stuck on the end, which I have seen), *anyone* can learn how to shoot rather accurately with it in a few sessions.
And then of course you have the arrows and bolts.
An arrow actually has to flex a little bit when it shoots, for good accuracy, it needs to be light and strong, but not too strong/stiff.
What happens however if it is too weak?
Well, it shatters as you fire it, and the end of the arrow will go through your hand. I saw one guy make arrows from dowel timber from B&Q, the shaft as it broke (of course it broke) entered above his thumb, and down his thumb under the skin.
Nice.
Crossbow bolts are shorter and stocker, they just need to be stiff and strong, bolts don't need to flex (though you can get crossbow arrows).
So a crossbow is easier to shoot, easier to make ammunition for, and probably easier to make decently if you have some metal work available.
Crossbows win hands down.
