[Manuka Jock]

Military secret: did you know that there are no written or picture references from medieval times to show what the trigger mechanism looked like?

Rope and Axe by the looks of it

 

[Manuka Jock]

This may be of help

http://members.iinet.net.au/~rmine/triggers.html

 

[Manuka Jock]

Something like this ?

 

[Manuka Jock]

These lads had fun

and started a Peace :thumbsup:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QW5l3-yUCMM&feature=youtu.be



http://blog.galgael.org/2012/04/25/charm-offensive/

 

[Manuka Jock]

What size is the 'correct' size ?
I doubt very much that there were rules of Medieval Warfare concerning the size of these weapons .
I recall reading that some had a crew of around 15 , and some as many as 45 , giving some indication of the variation in size.

'Helen', the GalGael Treebucket has a range of 180 Meters with lightweight hollow clay ball .
Loaded with heavy incendiary grenade , who knows what it could reach .

 

[Manuka Jock]

Of course they were 10 to 20 X that size

Rubbish

 

[Manuka Jock]

Wars back then lasted many generations.

No individual siege 'lasted many generations'.

A few wars did maybe , and they comprised of campaigns spread over different times and places.

 

[Manuka Jock]

180 meters was too close.. even longbows could reach you

On this planet , in the year 2012 , there were no longbowmen shooting across the river in Glasgow

What planet are you on ?

 

[Manuka Jock]

Of course they were 10 to 20 X that size

The trebuchet in the GalGael video is about 8-9 feet tall .
You in all your ignorance make the claim that

"Of course they were 10 to 20 X that size "

You have yet to back up your fantasy with fact .
Provice evidence of the existance of trebuchet that stood between 80 and 160 feet tall .

The arm on the Galgael trebuchet is about 20 feet long .
Show us the accounts that state that any had arms ranging from 200 feet to 400 feet in length .


You , a student of what ? :laughing:
0n what planet ......

 

[Manuka Jock]

You might do your own research, Manuka. Hugh Kennedy can fling a grand piano or a Hillman car more than 300m. Several YouTubes.
The throwing arm looks to be 40' long or so.

I already have pal .
I have a fair idea what is out there in terms of information on the matter .
Hugh Kennedy's one is about twice the size of the GalGael trebuchet .

The self professed 'student of medieval history' reckons that

Of course they were 10 to 20 X that size

meaning that the 'real ones' were 10 to 20 times the size of Galgael's "Mighty Helen" .
That works out to be about 80 and 160 feet for the height ,
and
200 feet to 400 feet for the length :laughing:

Funny how history forgot to report that fact eh

 

[Manuka Jock]

One where people aren't ignorant jerks

BTW I'm a student of medieval warfare, of clan MacGregor descent (Were we enemies in the old days?) and am about to build a literal castle :yes:

:laughing:

 

[Manuka Jock]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trebuchet

Problems with your scale rule professer ?

:icon_smile:

 

[Manuka Jock]

The castle got pulverized to dust by Gigantor , the Hulk and Godzilla and their 200 foot high treebucket with its 400 foot arm :thumbsup:

 

[Manuka Jock]

Well Earth, part of the reason i brought this topic up is because of my love of all things old. I make and use bows that can reliably hit targets 100 yrds away. its about balance, the arrow and the bow. the longbow men of old used bows that had draw weight close to 100 lb , today a modern compound bow is about 50 to 60. My bows are in the low 50s. but it was also the literal wall of arrows that would be shot. its not just 1 arrow its 300, and its not in well spaced times its 300 arrows about every 7 to 8 seconds. thats with a platoon of well trained and seasoned archers. now you may be correct in them not shooting over the river at Glasgow, but would you like to contaminate your water supply if you kill one.

The post that you have replied to was aimed at one particular member , and was in relation the rubbish that that individual has been posting on this thread .

 

[Manuka Jock]

You aren't taking down 12 foot thick stone walls without the sizes I listed.. maybe lobbing dead, rotting sheep but not much more

No trebuchet were ever built within the size range that you listed .
Making stuff up and historical research are two entirely different things .

 

[Manuka Jock]

I keep waiting for a game of D & D to break out on this thread. Then you guys would have something to argue about lol

No argument going on here mate , a liar is being put in it's place is all :thumbsup:

 

[Manuka Jock]

Bad. 'F' for the segway in this thread.

I feel sorry for the lot of you that don't have the opportunity to build trebuchet (what's the correct plural?) Whatever your inhibitions, you need to shed them. . . soon.

For me, it has made the reading of historical information all the more interesting. I've been there. I've done that 14 times. Plus, some contributed pictures of trebs, triggers and all. Build one like that. Try as you might, see if you can make those trigger work with 30,000 lbs in the counterweight. Horse-puckey. Don't you see? The trigger is the military secret.

Given the scaled geometry of a treb, can you imagine that I can carry the complete treb design, any size you can dream of, as a length of knotted cord in my pocket?

Taking into consideration the stress and strain on timber , bolts strapping , and axles ,
weights and sizes of of projectiles , and the loading of them , and trigger systems and their associated issues ,
what do you reckon the largest dimensions that a treebucket could be built to , and still operate successfully ?

 

[Manuka Jock]

The largest functioning trebuchet that I know of is the replica of the "War Wolf," built and operated by Hugh Kennedy in England. He explained that he'd found an historical claim that the WW was capable to tossing a horse into a castle court yard from 300 yards away. He reasoned that if the account were true, it should be possible to replicate the feat. He did exactly that, using an assumption that the horse would have weight some 1,500lbs. Anybody who uses Hillman and Renault cars for ammo impresses me with their design skill.
Only from video that I've seen, the arm is jointed/assembled like a split cane fly fishing rod, possibly 4-5 feet in diameter over the counter weight and likely 50+ feet in length. That means that the tower must be 30-40 feet tall or more. Yes, it is almost indescribably immense.

Be that as it may, I enjoy the entertainment of any treb with payloads of 20 lbs or less. Designed at 200:1, 4,000lbs in the counterweight is not unreasonable.

If you haven't found them so far, I suggest you look at the results from the trebuchet section of the Punkin Chunkin Contest, an annual veggie tossing event in the United States. If memory serves me, the record for the air cannon section is 4,000+ feet/1,230m, across a freeway and into the filed on the other side. They have a contest site. That implies that all the siege engines have to be trucked to the site and assembled.

You misread the question .
I have viewed much of the published material in the past , Kennedy and the Danes included , and know that on average , the larger trebuchets were about 4 stories high , 40 - 60 feet.
Given that you have told us that you have built some , I'm asking you for your opinion , base on your personal the experience, of what might be theoretically possible

 

[Manuka Jock]

I haven't given any thought to treb design for more than a decade. Yes, I am an experienced trebuchet builder with published pictures of examples.

Period Machines: I think that we've seen the best of them come and go. Were I to mount a campaign of conquest using trebuchet, you can bet your last dollar that my engineers would have the design figured out. Logically, that means that there was a lot of military research and development that we will never read about. The plans didn't come to them in a dream. Even the angle of the sling finger for proper release. The size limit might be reached by several things: the modulus of elasticity of woods available for the arm. Laminations are certainly superior to a log. They would have known that from long bow construction, even the correct orientation of the growth rings. Friction on the slide with the sling basket. Grease can only do so much. For my part, a little 5W30 motor oil on axle parts has quite a dramatic effect. Inertia = how do you get the mass of the projectile to even begin to move? A rock would have fewer and more intensly confined pressure points on the slide, than a horse.

Modern Machines: I am not, nor ever was, a materials engineer. As parts of university dendrology courses, I did teach the fundamentals of mechanical and non mechanical properties as they apply to wood. Look for specifics on your own time.
What would I try, from the materials I'm aware of?
Arm: Boron-doped, carbon fiber lay up. The design might be eliptical in XS, the long/strong axis parallel to the plane of rotation. Roller bearings. ball bearings (which is best?) for the two axle points.
Swinging counterweight, made of and loaded with the densest element in the Periodic Table (can't find my reference book but I know for sure it isn't Uranium.)
Limits: Besides friction on the slide (travelling carriage?), overcoming the inertia of the projectile is not going to go away.
Risks: The counterweight is falling due to gravity as the arm begins its rotation. When the sling loop comes off the finger and the projectile is released, the arm does not come to a sudden freakin' halt.
The overtravel goes into quite violent recoil oscillations (very disconcerting if you aren't ready for it.)
As you know from reading, both the arm and the counterweight are flapping about. This is where I think that the failure will occur.
Desires: give me an automated disk brake damping system on the arm/counterweight pivot point. It's delayed beyond the release of the sling loop from the finger.

If it wasn't my money, I'd try an arm, 60' total. The tower and slide are not an issue. Loading would be least risky by lifting the counterweight, not pulling down on the arm. You've seen those people-powered wind-up mechanisms? Why do you suppose they went that way in the design? Huh? What did they break most easily? It is one big Hello of a surprise when the arm breaks. Cable trigger, not some box-latch screw-up. Can you imagine an iron counterweight and an electromagnetic latch?

Find a materials engineer, young person. Bring them up to speed and pitch the same question to them.

So , in answer to my original question you do not see any merit in building a wooden tree bucket any bigger , taller , longer , than those that have already been built , due to timber , iron and the technology of the medieval period not being fit for the task .

cheers

 

[Manuka Jock]

You know, one thing just occurred to me. If trebs were popular and effective, how come it is that there aren't more identified artifacts in the form of BIG round stones/projectiles? I know that lots of big stones from various stone circles were cut up and carted off for building material.

If out of balance ammo such as beehives, clay balls loaded with small stone shrapnel , casks of tar and oil on fire, dead animals , and prisoners of war and spies all manages to hit the targets , why would stone shot have to be manicured ?
Raw rock fired at stone walls , if they survived the impact , would not necessarily be distinguishable from the rubble .

I like the Monty Pythonesque conquistador anecdote :laughing: .
It would make a great scene in a film .

It may be that the great siege engines were fired more in the telling than in the doing , and that the threat of the Trebuchet was often more than enough to do the job .

The wolf that the vile longshanks built and used at Caerlaverock in 1300 against my Maxwell kin was only ever fired there once , and that was after the Garrison had already surrendered .
(Some say that theirs was a delaying tactic only , part of a greater strategy , and that a sustained defence would have only resulted in the unnecessary destruction of our Clan Seat )