Alternative projectile weapons
- Thread starter Shtudmuffin
- Start date
You can use it with one hand, but need two to load it. Speaking as one who has actually tried it, a well-thrown stone can be quite accurate and pack quite a wallop. It won't penetrate heavy armor, but is effective otherwise. The main drawback is that the effective range is quite short, less than 50m; not ideal for a lightly armed, unarmored foot soldier.
I'm my aborted Caesar TL a Judean slinger in the Roman auxiliaries kills Parthian king Pacorus. Never underestimate slingers!
PhilippeO
Banned
50 for sling is too short.
ancient slingers trained from childhood, and possibly they use staff sling.
From Wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Staff_sling#Combat
ancient slingers trained from childhood, and possibly they use staff sling.
From Wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Staff_sling#Combat
And that range is under ideal conditions - no wind, rain, snow, etc. and nobody was shooting back or trying to chop his head off. In battle the EFFECTIVE range would be quite short, closer to the 50m I gave above.
Yeah.
I know that a longbow in battle is 250-300 yards firing as far as the bow can project an arrow with any effectiveness, and about a quarter of that if you want to penetrate late medieval armor.
So even if wind, rain, snow etc. aren't an issue, the difference between the furthest a projectile designed for distance can go and the range you can crack skulls is inevitably substantial.
I believe that weapon is to volatile, it poses a significant risk to the users on the battlefield, it might work when combating enemies who use an exotic language.
Yes, the Romans and others did so, normally of cast lead.
That would increase the sling's lethality and maximum range, but not its EFFECTIVE range; the range at which a skilled user could be reliably expected to injure or kill an opponent under normal battlefield conditions.
Effective ranges are shorter, often much shorter, than maximum ranges because:
One, the weapon loses accuracy at extreme ranges and cannot be expected to hit the target with any regularity. Unguided missile weapons fall into this category.
Two, the projectile loses energy in proportion to the distance traveled; at extreme ranges it lacks sufficient energy to harm the target with any regularity. Even rockets fall into this category, because as they burn fuel they lose mass, which lowers their kinetic energy at impact.
Three, maximum ranges are only obtainable under ideal conditions; condition which do not exist on a normal battlefield. It is of absolutely no use to throw a sling bullet 400m if one cannot see a target that far away due to dust, smoke, fog, or whatever, or if the bullet lacks sufficient energy to damage the target even if the slinger is lucky enough to hit it. If the slinger is having to throw while avoiding return fire or dodging swords and axes, as happens in battle, his accuracy is bound to suffer for it, which makes it even more unlikely for him to hit a distant target.
At long ranges, i don't think accuracy matters much. Just the same as with archers, you'll have formations of slingers launching volleys, and the damage you deal on the enemy formation will be more a matter of chance than accuracy of the ranged weapon.
For the sling aficionados among you, here's a good resource that details their strength and weaknesses, particular tactics and sometimes novel ammo:
http://www.chrisharrison.net/index.php/Research/Sling
http://www.chrisharrison.net/index.php/Research/Sling
Which doesn't work nearly as well with slings as other ranged weapons like bows.
Sling attacks are hard (impossible?) to coordinate well enough for proper volleys.
And "a group all attacking at not quite the same time" is not quite the same as synchronized fire.
There was a good article in Scientific American in October 1973 on slings. It was amazing what they could do. Basically the same stopping power as a .45 pistol, if I remember correctly. Gives a whole new meaning to David and Goliath. If Doc Holliday had gone up against Goliath with 5 chambers loaded in his Colt.... That's what Goliath was up against.
Some comparative stats on the relative power of spears, atlatl darts, arrows and firearms:
http://www.thudscave.com/npaa/articles/howhard.htm
Atlatl darts seem to do very well compared to even modern arrows.
Atlatl darts, unlike slings, could conceivably be used as a volley weapon, but I don't think they were ever used as such by the organized societies that used them.
Of course firearms are on a whole other level in terms of kinetic energy, not surprisingly.
Would love to see sling data incorporated into the above.
http://www.thudscave.com/npaa/articles/howhard.htm
Atlatl darts seem to do very well compared to even modern arrows.
Atlatl darts, unlike slings, could conceivably be used as a volley weapon, but I don't think they were ever used as such by the organized societies that used them.
Of course firearms are on a whole other level in terms of kinetic energy, not surprisingly.
Would love to see sling data incorporated into the above.
Admittedly, I know very little of the actual mechanics of the sling, but i don't see what is the problem for volleys of slingers being practical. Can you give me a bit of insight on that?
The way i see it, they can carry for the first volleys a pouch with lead projectiles, and with the proper discipline they should be able to fire coordinately. Right? What am i missing?
The way i see it, they can carry for the first volleys a pouch with lead projectiles, and with the proper discipline they should be able to fire coordinately. Right? What am i missing?