Main Discussion Area > English Warbow

Weapons of Warre: The Ordnance of the Mary Rose

<< < (3/7) > >>

Phil Rees:
Craig
Thanks for the first glance review.
I haven't recieved my copy yet, but from your quick "once over" , is it telling us anything new.

Ian.:
Thanks for the run down Craig, it doesn't surprise me that there is not much about the bows all it would need would be for them to consult a bow maker and they could have said what info was needed. I hope they release a booklets of all the different weapons individually.

CraigMBeckett:

--- Quote from: Ian. on July 30, 2011, 10:58:13 am ---Thanks for the run down Craig, it doesn't surprise me that there is not much about the bows all it would need would be for them to consult a bow maker and they could have said what info was needed. I hope they release a booklets of all the different weapons individually.

--- End quote ---

Yes what we need is the raw data that one would include in any report/dissertation. :)

Have now finished reading the archery section, there is information there that I have not come across before and the section on arrows is very good considering the paucity of information we previously had. Various claims are made that are arguable, but what else would one expect. There are also sections that one wonders why they put them in including one that tries to establish the weights (notice the plural) of the bows from the spine of the arrows, the gentleman who does the analysis appears to be a statistician and not an archer, (his statistics later on are excellent), he uses the AMO spine charts but as the published charts does not extend out to the deflections obtained he has produced an rather complicated equation to calculate these deflections/spines, which to me shows he is unaware of the original basis of the AMO charts which is 26/deflection = spine. The results are then adjusted to provide results for hunting or target shafts. He also does not seem to have adjusted for arrow length. Must have another read of the section as I may be doing this gentleman a disservice.

Now don't get me wrong I am not saying don't bother with the book, quite the contrary it is an excellent thing and I am looking forward to beginning at the start of part 1 and reading it through it looks to be very interesting and informative even if not as totally informative as we could wish.

Craig.

CraigMBeckett:
MMM! have been playing around with the bow data and comparing it with the data I obtained from their artifact database some time ago, (I'm an Engineer, I do things like this to verify data). And have some disturbing results, when comparing the information on the complete bows whose length is both in the artifact data base and published in Weapons of Warre instead of the bows being either the same length or smaller (due to continued drying) over 1/3 are reported to be larger, 35.96% or 32 of the 82 I have two sets of lengths for. Average variation is -5.4m Maximum positive is 71mm max negative is -103mm. These changes in length cannot be explained by changes in the moisture content of the bows, a lot of the changes are far too big for that (40 mm and more), so therefore the accuracy of the results is in question.

I also have had a look to see if amongst the information in "Weapons" I can identify the two bows Hugh Soar published dimensions of. Bow A based on width and depth at the centre could be artifact 81A3958 will have to check extrapolate dimensions at 500 and 800 mm and see if they are close. I can only find one bow whose lenght is close to the 83 inches Soar shows its centre is 39x36, which is not really that close to Soars 41X35mm but it could still be the same bow. This artifact is No 79A0807 will also have to check this one more closely. It is of course possible that neither of the bows are shown in "Weapons".

Craig.

Ian.:
That is strange, there are many bows its likely that people for the most part are picking up different bows each time. was it the MR who published the first table of measurements and have you got a link to the artifact data base.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page