- Joined
- Sep 1, 2018
- Messages
- 10
From what I know, evidences and hints of Crossbows pretty much disappeared completely in Japan until Edo period(1603-1868). Manga is in 1567 now.
Sengoku Komachi Kuroutan: Noukou Giga - Vol. 2 Ch. 10 - Entertainment
- Thread starter MangaDex
- Start date
Member
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2018
- Messages
- 35
Huh the more you know
Thank you @Huapollon
Thank you @Huapollon
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2018
- Messages
- 9,241
Average height of 140 cm? Really? My youngest sister is already taller than that...
Contributor
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2018
- Messages
- 861
@fahmikan
Also, a more of a physics fun fact, the crossbow that she invented does not use a lever to draw the bow, but by hand. Which means, for a crossbow to shoot through the target and the armor, she herself has to have the equivalent draw strength to do so, regardless of it being the xbow or longbow, making it hilarious that she couldn't draw the longbow despite easily drawing a heavier crossbow.
Also, a more of a physics fun fact, the crossbow that she invented does not use a lever to draw the bow, but by hand. Which means, for a crossbow to shoot through the target and the armor, she herself has to have the equivalent draw strength to do so, regardless of it being the xbow or longbow, making it hilarious that she couldn't draw the longbow despite easily drawing a heavier crossbow.
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2018
- Messages
- 2,706
@greyhud90
Read the whole thread. There's a whole lot of discussion about that
Read the whole thread. There's a whole lot of discussion about that
Active member
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2018
- Messages
- 114
@Yadokari
B. In comparison of Accuracy between bows, crossbows and arquebus, Arquebus inaccuracy are overstated because it is usually compared to later firearms, instead of compared to bows. Skilled gun shooters can shoot with acceptable accuracy - the reason of inaccuracy in that era is mostly lack of training. Most gunners of the time aren't given time nor gunpowder nor target practice. The training soldiers were given were mostly shooting drills for cohesion and reload time - not even trained to aim, but point to a specific enemy line at command. That's why hunters made great sharpshooters in the age of musketry, even without their rifles.
That's for individual accuracy. However in Battlefield context, soldiers shoots in mass volleys, making it less relevant. This is why shooting drills were emphasised than target practice. Again, early gunpowder soldiers weren't trained to aim. One disadvantage of blackpowder weapon in this regard compared to bows, is the gunsmoke forming a fog hindering visibility.
D. Bows and Crossbows are also affected by rain, even if less so than gunpowder weapon. Strings need to be kept dry for ideal performance, but crossbows can't be strung and unstrung as easily as bows. Bows of the time with its natural material do not perform well when wet, especially composite bows which are glued together. Crossbow which uses steel prods (Chinese Crossbows uses composite prods) isn't as prone to this.
F. No.
450lb crossbow, 4.5 inch powerstroke, shooting 60g bolt at 42.4m/s yielded 54J
1000lb crossbow (need windlass to span), shooting 96g bolt at 47.9m/s yielded 110J
From:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSNNSh4Fuh8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHnZo6ELEV0
I use this as the benchmark for arquebus
https://ptu-biuletyn.pl/resources/html/article/details?id=156326&language=en
2 monme (7.5g bullet) at 200m/s yielded 181.5J
4 monme (15g bullet) at 220m/s yielded 363J
6 monme (22.5g bullet) with 220m/s yielded 544.5J
Arquebus are much more powerful
G. Depends on the crossbow type and poundage. The lighter models that can be spanned with hand, spanning belt, or goat's foot lever are quicker. The heavier ones which need Windlass or Cranequin roughly have the same reload speed.
Again, this reload rate also depends on the troops' training level and skill. Guns, like bows, need well-trained soldier that can calmly reload and shoot even under stress of battlefield danger.
That's why I disagree if someone says "guns need less training than bows" no, gunners too still some need training to be effective in the battlefield, transition to gunpowder can't be boiled down to one simple reason.
@NazrinMaus
Windlass make reloading what you called siege crossbows not needing lots of strength. It's relatively much lighter if you have 78:1 mechanical advantage
@Huapollon
At least she can use her back and stomach muscles and both arms together for crossbow.
The Nara Imperial Army was using Crossbow due to the Japanese copying anything Chinese in the Taika Reforms, including the centralized Imperial Army. Crossbow is one of the cornerstone of the Chinese standardized and mass-produced weapons and equipment. The rise of the Samurai clans and regional feudal armies ended this trend as the Japanese Emperor actual power and authority waned. Actually, the return of professionalized mass Ashigaru armies in the Sengoku Jidai is suitable for return of crossbows, but that in that time Arquebus already existed so they just used that.
B. In comparison of Accuracy between bows, crossbows and arquebus, Arquebus inaccuracy are overstated because it is usually compared to later firearms, instead of compared to bows. Skilled gun shooters can shoot with acceptable accuracy - the reason of inaccuracy in that era is mostly lack of training. Most gunners of the time aren't given time nor gunpowder nor target practice. The training soldiers were given were mostly shooting drills for cohesion and reload time - not even trained to aim, but point to a specific enemy line at command. That's why hunters made great sharpshooters in the age of musketry, even without their rifles.
That's for individual accuracy. However in Battlefield context, soldiers shoots in mass volleys, making it less relevant. This is why shooting drills were emphasised than target practice. Again, early gunpowder soldiers weren't trained to aim. One disadvantage of blackpowder weapon in this regard compared to bows, is the gunsmoke forming a fog hindering visibility.
D. Bows and Crossbows are also affected by rain, even if less so than gunpowder weapon. Strings need to be kept dry for ideal performance, but crossbows can't be strung and unstrung as easily as bows. Bows of the time with its natural material do not perform well when wet, especially composite bows which are glued together. Crossbow which uses steel prods (Chinese Crossbows uses composite prods) isn't as prone to this.
F. No.
450lb crossbow, 4.5 inch powerstroke, shooting 60g bolt at 42.4m/s yielded 54J
1000lb crossbow (need windlass to span), shooting 96g bolt at 47.9m/s yielded 110J
From:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSNNSh4Fuh8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHnZo6ELEV0
I use this as the benchmark for arquebus
https://ptu-biuletyn.pl/resources/html/article/details?id=156326&language=en
2 monme (7.5g bullet) at 200m/s yielded 181.5J
4 monme (15g bullet) at 220m/s yielded 363J
6 monme (22.5g bullet) with 220m/s yielded 544.5J
Arquebus are much more powerful
G. Depends on the crossbow type and poundage. The lighter models that can be spanned with hand, spanning belt, or goat's foot lever are quicker. The heavier ones which need Windlass or Cranequin roughly have the same reload speed.
Again, this reload rate also depends on the troops' training level and skill. Guns, like bows, need well-trained soldier that can calmly reload and shoot even under stress of battlefield danger.
That's why I disagree if someone says "guns need less training than bows" no, gunners too still some need training to be effective in the battlefield, transition to gunpowder can't be boiled down to one simple reason.
@NazrinMaus
Windlass make reloading what you called siege crossbows not needing lots of strength. It's relatively much lighter if you have 78:1 mechanical advantage
@Huapollon
At least she can use her back and stomach muscles and both arms together for crossbow.
The Nara Imperial Army was using Crossbow due to the Japanese copying anything Chinese in the Taika Reforms, including the centralized Imperial Army. Crossbow is one of the cornerstone of the Chinese standardized and mass-produced weapons and equipment. The rise of the Samurai clans and regional feudal armies ended this trend as the Japanese Emperor actual power and authority waned. Actually, the return of professionalized mass Ashigaru armies in the Sengoku Jidai is suitable for return of crossbows, but that in that time Arquebus already existed so they just used that.
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2018
- Messages
- 3,132
Hmm. I wonder about the penetration of that crossbow. Without a lever, piercing through armor IS curious. On the other hand, the crossbow loading lets her use both arms in one direction as well as a leg for stability, which could account for about double the force she could get out of a bow.
I guess the impressive part about it isn't penetration relative to bows, but the ability to go full power without a loss in accuracy/stamina.
I guess the impressive part about it isn't penetration relative to bows, but the ability to go full power without a loss in accuracy/stamina.
Member
- Joined
- May 3, 2018
- Messages
- 313
@Huapollon @fahmikan
at page 24 shizuko uses two hands to draw the string while stepping the base this would reduce the effort compare to a bow.
from what i read from that jp wiki site at around 10th century crossbow loss it popularity the reason is the maintenance it needs,
bow was more efficient, and at that time samurai/bushi (bushido thinking) was born.
The bad thing concerning about crossbow that loss its popularity that time was due to shorter range and slow reload.
The mechanism used in that crossbow is similar to what you see in umbrella not sure since it was not specified.
It is pointed out by other user that the Art of War by Sun Tzu is widely known in that era, probably there was something in that text that
pointed out the proper use in crossbow in war, what you see in musket strategy to reduce the disadvantage of low reload.
at page 24 shizuko uses two hands to draw the string while stepping the base this would reduce the effort compare to a bow.
from what i read from that jp wiki site at around 10th century crossbow loss it popularity the reason is the maintenance it needs,
bow was more efficient, and at that time samurai/bushi (bushido thinking) was born.
The bad thing concerning about crossbow that loss its popularity that time was due to shorter range and slow reload.
The mechanism used in that crossbow is similar to what you see in umbrella not sure since it was not specified.
It is pointed out by other user that the Art of War by Sun Tzu is widely known in that era, probably there was something in that text that
pointed out the proper use in crossbow in war, what you see in musket strategy to reduce the disadvantage of low reload.
@kittyraider @Huapollon @NazrinMaus @Yadokari
ACCURACY:
It depends on what you mean by "Arquebus inaccuracy was overstated" Even in massed volleys, the early arquebus wasn't effective out past around 100 yards or so, while the later musket could consistently manage up to 150 yards with good drill. By contrast, a bow could manage between 150-250 yards depending on draw weight and volley skill, while crossbows varied wildly depending on what shooting style the crossbowmen were trained in; most European crossbowmen were treated as a form of archer militia with minimal training and light crossbows which gave them an engagement range closer to that of the arquebus, whereas true marksman in the style and heavy crossbows first propagated in Italy could almost match English longbows in range with better accuracy.
Note that these numbers apply to massed volley fire, not individual marksmanship.
Firearms (until the invention of the leather patch (a primitive form of sabot) and consistent rifling manufacture) would have well and away the lowest effective range and accuracy for three reasons; training, the mass of gunsmoke, and the insufficiency of gunsmithing and metallurgy technology. In particular, until the invention of the Minie ball and its accompanying advancements (variations of which would arise in several parts of the world), gunsmithing techniques were not capable of creating a bullet-to-barrel tight seal without wrecking the gun in some fashion. This meant that every shot would have substantial deviation as the bullet bounced off the walls of the firearm, and only the speed at which the bullet was propelled would give any accuracy worth mentioning at all. To a certain extent, all of these rules applied to larger guns as well, such as cannons.
ARMOR PENETRATION:
Despite myths to the contrary, crossbows as a rule could not penetrate armor plate. They could certainly penetrate mail, but so could a bow with a thin arrow head. The benefit of the crossbow over the bow with regards to penetration was twofold; effectively ignoring any gambeson or similar non-metal armor / padding, and being harder to deflect.
Being harder to deflect needs some explanation. See, if an arrow from a longbow hits armor plate, it is more likely to bounce off than deflect around the plate. Observe:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ej3qjUzUzQg
Whereas a crossbow bolt is more likely to be "absorbed" or deflected instead of bounced:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMT6hjwY8NQ
With volley tactics, this means that a crossbow volley is much more likely to dent armor and hinder movement and/or breathing, or be redirected into joints and other weak areas.
For comparison, a flintlock musket (which can also be used to simulate an arquebus at the distance in this video):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bjs4-u5lO60
ACCURACY:
It depends on what you mean by "Arquebus inaccuracy was overstated" Even in massed volleys, the early arquebus wasn't effective out past around 100 yards or so, while the later musket could consistently manage up to 150 yards with good drill. By contrast, a bow could manage between 150-250 yards depending on draw weight and volley skill, while crossbows varied wildly depending on what shooting style the crossbowmen were trained in; most European crossbowmen were treated as a form of archer militia with minimal training and light crossbows which gave them an engagement range closer to that of the arquebus, whereas true marksman in the style and heavy crossbows first propagated in Italy could almost match English longbows in range with better accuracy.
Note that these numbers apply to massed volley fire, not individual marksmanship.
Firearms (until the invention of the leather patch (a primitive form of sabot) and consistent rifling manufacture) would have well and away the lowest effective range and accuracy for three reasons; training, the mass of gunsmoke, and the insufficiency of gunsmithing and metallurgy technology. In particular, until the invention of the Minie ball and its accompanying advancements (variations of which would arise in several parts of the world), gunsmithing techniques were not capable of creating a bullet-to-barrel tight seal without wrecking the gun in some fashion. This meant that every shot would have substantial deviation as the bullet bounced off the walls of the firearm, and only the speed at which the bullet was propelled would give any accuracy worth mentioning at all. To a certain extent, all of these rules applied to larger guns as well, such as cannons.
ARMOR PENETRATION:
Despite myths to the contrary, crossbows as a rule could not penetrate armor plate. They could certainly penetrate mail, but so could a bow with a thin arrow head. The benefit of the crossbow over the bow with regards to penetration was twofold; effectively ignoring any gambeson or similar non-metal armor / padding, and being harder to deflect.
Being harder to deflect needs some explanation. See, if an arrow from a longbow hits armor plate, it is more likely to bounce off than deflect around the plate. Observe:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ej3qjUzUzQg
Whereas a crossbow bolt is more likely to be "absorbed" or deflected instead of bounced:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMT6hjwY8NQ
With volley tactics, this means that a crossbow volley is much more likely to dent armor and hinder movement and/or breathing, or be redirected into joints and other weak areas.
For comparison, a flintlock musket (which can also be used to simulate an arquebus at the distance in this video):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bjs4-u5lO60
Member
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2018
- Messages
- 194
@ninjadork username checks out
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2018
- Messages
- 864
Shizuko has quite the 5head.
Aggregator gang
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2019
- Messages
- 897
Thank youuu for the chapter, since MC was invited to the banquet, i thought she would meet Nobunaga's son again 😂
Aggregator gang
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2018
- Messages
- 1,888
her face in the end, lol
See ya in the next volume, I guess :v
See ya in the next volume, I guess :v
Similar threads
