In the previous "Hohma" I casually touched the topic of "antique" artillery - throwing siege cars, catapult, baller and other. But, with attentive look at this topic, the most interesting, you can say, spicy details!
It's curious: in the old sources, there are full drawings and engravings, poor and primitive, depicting guns and canoners at work. Perspective, poses, composition - everything is not suitable anywhere, but at least the cannons are recognizable. More or less.
But, the same weak, children's drawings a baluste and a catapult!
If the catapult is strictly followed by the laws of the proportion, the muscles and the backs of the legionaries, torque "charging", the horses are frightening, and so on, etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc.
Why is that?
The answer "knights" KVI - the canonical version of history - Ready: The Roman Empire fell under the blows of nomads, Europe plunged into the darkness of the early Middle Ages, at the end of which Europeans had to learn to read, write and protect the natural need ... Including to draw, naturally .
Therefore, in the books of our historians, the wonderful pictures with the image of the ancient "stone stones" are quite legal, adjacent to the primitive sketches of medieval artilleryrs.
Well, come from the other end. And where are the archaeologically reliable remains of "ancient" (as well as medieval!) Sound machines?
They are not observed. At exactly, in the case of tripirs, whose decks are the ballists allegedly decorated.
It is interesting: the scraper and cutter of the Paleolithic in the arsenal of archaeologists have, harpuna and the spears of neolithic from archaeologists have, swords-daggers of the Bronze Age, they are also evident.
Even petrified excrement of the silurian trilobite is. But, there are no relatively recent kamnites - as cut off.
If somewhere stands such a combat machine, I am sure: Novodel. Moreover, non-functional.
Yu. Shokarev ("The History of Weapons. Artillery"), describing the "catapult" period of artillery history, suddenly notes with bewilderment that it is generally problematic with archaeological confirmation on this topic.
Like, a message flashed once again about the alleged find of the remains of the ancient ballista, but, upon closer, they turned out to be so doubtful that they were decided to not consider them closely. And even better - not to consider and pretend to pretend that they did not find anything.
And you can go to the third end. If there are no direct evidence, maybe there are indirect?
Oddly enough, they remained. These are the very walls, against which, in fact, all, the so-called rocks are mashed.
We do not understand anything if we do not consider the history of fortification in the dynamics. There is a very clear line: XV century, the second half.
Starting from that time, serfs began to quickly "settle in the ground" and "Write".
High-altered stone or brick walls turn into low thick earth shafts, towers - in four-edged bausers - bastions, too low, thick-walled, earthy.
Finally, the fortress wall, like a means of accommodating and covering the shooters, ordered a long time to live.
From the end of the XIX century, the fortress, fort is a system of small (visually small, for inside a full concrete, weapons and complex systems Life support, sometimes built in two or three tiers; - I saw himself), extremely recessed to the ground and superbly disguised fortifications equipped with machine guns and rapid mapping cannon.
From Caponiary to Conofer there is no solid chain of fighters along Escarp or Shaft. Actually shaft with a moat is just a means to delay the enemy attacking infantry for those seconds, which will be required to flanking the machine gun in order to cut it.
High stone wall replaced by invisible wall bullets and tools. Of course, in combination with earthworks and barbed wire.
Especially if the wire enhances the "know-how" of General Karbysheva: fishing hooks on steel leashes. Very unpleasant thing, you know.
What am I talking about? I'm about gunshot siege weapons.
Prior to its appearance, fortificitifier engineers seem to even see the existence of some other long-range weapons.
All these "antique" and "medieval" walls are purely anti-personnel structures. Roughly speaking, the higher the fence, the harder it is to climb it.
Of course, in a high "fence" it is easy to flip a cobblestone from a stone. But for some reason, it does not care for some reason, in contrast to their descendants who had to build fortifications against guns.
They know that it is impossible to break their walls and therefore they are cumbersome and five, and ten meters high are magnificent targets for "antique artillery".
And the thickness of those walls is determined extremely requirements of stability: the higher the construction, the greater the area of \u200b\u200bits foundation should be.
But the commander of our imaginary siege corps knows! Can not not know: otherwise it would simply be prescribed to this post.
And what, he, with sad doomed, drags on bulls heavy Mahina Chert-tehnoye knows from where and with hopeless persistence it comes into the walls with obviously useless stones and stones?
And a kind of duke, financing the whole campaign, folding his hands on the stomach, quietly observes how his money literally is stripped into the air? What kind of absurdity!
Let's try to approach the problem from the fourth end, namely, from the point of view of physics.
I ask: Is it possible to generally create such a throwing machine so that it is stones and stakes destroyed the defensive wall of the sample, say the XII century?
The practice of modern engineers shows that there is no. Above, I have already mentioned the attempts of American engineers to create workable replicas "Kamnites" by order of film crews. Did not come out.
The reason was not at the disposal of medieval and "antique" masters of materials suitable for this purpose.
I had to fasten the heart, design "Ballists" and other abracadabra using rubber harnesses, elastic elements from modern steel and synthetic materials.
From the book in the book, the ballad on the dedication of certain women, residents of a certain besieged city, who in the rustling of patriotism donated their hair to the defenders allegedly for the "maintenance" of the stone.
This feat is attributed to the Carthagencé townors, then the ladies of Monsengeur, then to someone. Moreover, always from the context it follows that the familiar hair went on the equipment of some "ballylter".
Meanwhile, it is well known that female hair is very good for the manufacture of a robe. I do not know, voluntarily or not very, but the ladies have cut themselves for archers and in any way ...
Or maybe "Ancient Ellity" have a caprochy fiber?
Everything is fine! - tell us the Quists. They knew such special ways or soak, or to dry all sorts of bullies not that residents, not the intestine, then weave them with female hair and raw straps, then attach pieces of violence horns and almost whale oss, in general, everything They worked as needed!
And then, the historians sigh sadly, - the secret was hopelessly lost ...
This notorious Saga is about the lost secret (SUS) so already imposed in the teeth, which is comparable, perhaps, only with Balladic about an unknown nomad (see above).
Sometimes you are affected by the complete absence of elementary erudition in people who simply obliged to be erudites, at least in the tops.
Well, you don't need to climb into the subtleties of technological processes, understanding at least with their results!
What they just did not drive into the category of SUS - Damascus Steel and Zlatoust Bulat, the jewelry art of the Inca and the Iron Column in Delhi.
And the unwitting ballbacks, the right, you will not pick another word that the semi-graphic medieval blacksmith-empiricity could know more than the whole metallurgical research institute, and it does not come to mind to look into the rest of the balls, catch in a smoking room and a little bit of him Praese.
And would explain it to them MNA that the technology of manufacture, say "Damaskaya" steel in principle is uncomplicated, but damn labor time and absorbs a lot of time, if there is a desire - you can jarny, but it will rise in such a penny, it will take so much that it's easier to order a knife , Say, from the file.
Let's do ten times faster and ten times cheaper, and the quality of the blade will be even higher. Just a damask blade is more beautiful, its grinding surface seems "wavy", only and just.
And about the Delia pillar would tell. And the Zlatousty Bulat did not even think about to disappear, officer cortices and front executioners in the same Zlatoust are still kidding from it. I had such a cortk. Steel - miracle, even glass cut.
Anyway, stakes and stones at some point began to fly. But how to fly?
Projectile little thorough to the target. It is necessary that at the end of the trajectory it retains enough energy for breaking or at least damage to the barrier. In our case, the medieval ("antique") fortress wall.
Such a wall is two walls of stone blocks or bricks, a thickness of meters and more, with transverse connections and caisson compartments filled with tightly rammed soil.
The kinetic energy of the projectile is determined as half of the product of its mass per square square at the time of collision with the obstacle.
So, the shells of cinema catapult do not have such energy!
Suppose legionnaires, rigging, laid a twenty colossogram cobblestone in the bucket. It takes the initial speed of it in 50 m / s, no more, and from what considerations: in the frames of the films, it is perfectly visible in flight.
I had a widow to shoot from the GP-25 bare grenade launcher; The initial speed of its pomegranates - 76 m / s. The arrows - or an observer looking over his shoulder - some fraction of a second grenade sees, because his line of sight coincides with the line of throwing grenade launcher.
In other words, the angular movement of the garnet relative to the arrow is zero. But it is necessary to shift almost to the side and the grenade in the flight will not see anymore. So - 50 m / s and no more.
We have: the kinetic energy of our imaginary cobblestone at the time of the shot 25 kJ. Is there a lot or a little? There is something to compare!
A similar indicator for a 23 mm anti-aircraft gun "Shilka" - 115 kJ. Four more times more. And, nevertheless, even to dream that with the help of such a anti-aircraft gun, say, the wall of an ordinary brick "Khrushchka" - in three bricks - not necessary.
I had a case to try. You can "drill", sewing a long queue into the same place of shells fifty, but it is when sniper accuracy, which can only be provided with cutting automatic weapons with its high adhesion of shooting! I don't even stutter about the Kremlin Wall.
And it doesn't matter that the weight of 23-mm projectile is 200 g, and the weight of the cobblestone is 20 kg: it is not important in itself, but energy.
Moreover, because of its non-optimal, from the point of view of aerodynamics, the forms of this cobblestone will very quickly lose the speed in the flight and the wall crashes completely exhausted.
And if you take a bigger stone? But he will fly slower, and the speed will lose faster due to large geometric sizes in the same unsuccessful form. He can not fly to goal at all.
Good, and stakes? And worse. The projectile, among other things, should be made of the material, the mechanical strength of which, at least, is not inferior to the strength of the barrier. Drawberry - by stone?!
And if the end of the iron is accumulated? And if the fat, powerful knobs to attach? It is impossible: weight! Such an "boom" is generally right in front of the ballist, and some of his sobble.
Okay, the opponent does not take place, and pots with fuel liquid? What not "flamethrower"?
And with what, actually, liquid? All modern liquid and condensed flames are made on the basis of light, flammable fuels, type of gasoline.
Raw oil for this case, oddly enough, unsuitable; I do not want to clutter the presentation, so I will only say that it lights up extremely reluctant and burning sluggish until he is heated, and during this time it can be easily extinguished, and in her pot oh like a little.
Some vegetable oil? But it is very expensive even now, with modern agricultural technologies and, moreover, (here is the annoyance!), In itself, again, it does not burn: you need a package, wick, contributing to heating and evaporation. So, present me, please antique cracking column.
Well, we poured some frying rubbish in Krinka, charged in the catapult, setbacks and rushed the trigger ... Where in a second it is fuel? That's right, we have on our heads. Do we need it?
In short, all this is nonsense. In modern napalm bombs to inflamm the fire mixture, an impactary explosion is used, a discontinuous charge for the destruction of the housing and the igniter, instantly gives the ultra-high temperature for evaporation and ignition of the mixture.
You can, of course, throw simply resin torches. But after all, they will not fly away: lobby, with a large air resistance ... so if you give them a decent aerodynamic form!
So it is already done. We build a right of the archers and distribute to everyone in the quiver of incendiary arrows. Shooting range is higher than that of some heavy flamethrower. Cheating - immeasurably higher. And most importantly: a lot of firefighters are created quickly and inexpensively.
Arrow - She's small, smart, track the fall of each - from hundreds! - It is unrealistic, and one not detected on time the arrow gives a fire focus. So why do we need a non-effective tool, if there is effective?!
A somewhat mansion in historical fabrications about antique flamethroughs are some "flamethrower pipes". Historians are trying to convince themselves and others that it is coming here about the "classic" flamethrough, that is, a jet of combustible fluid.
It flames in action they, of course, saw - in the personnel of a military chamber film. But take, for example, the book of V.N. Shunkova "Weapons of the Red Army" and read in it a description of the device of flamethrower, hardly borrowed, otherwise they would not write nonsense.
Inherent component Classical flamethrower - air balloon under pressure of 100-200 atm.
If "Ellina", relying on the level of the then metallurgy and could make a bronze tank, designed for such a pressure, then what would they charge it? Manual furs? Not funny.
But the unagnation lies on the surface. "Pipe, a fantastic fire" is just a gun, such as she sees the observer who is not accustomed to this.
The then powder, being low quality, to burn completely in the trunk did not have time and the gun, indeed, spent the monstrous languages \u200b\u200bof the flame.
It is now high-quality powder providing an almost adhesive shot.
And all: "antique" text that mentions "Flameless Pipes", safely went there, where he should be and should be in the Middle Ages.
There were still such exotic ammunition, like pots with uncleanness and corpses of contagious patients. This is just an ineffective weapon.
Even if we squeeze the golden to several assholes so that they drag such a corpse to the "battery", how to transfer a 70-80 kilogram dead man through an enemy wall?! What is the catapult?!
Yes, after all, on the side of that side, no idiots are sitting, they cut down that it is unclean and cause doctors and sanitary-trouteros. And they know what to do.
After all, in fact, a serious danger is not the corpses of the dead from diseases, but quite lively and externally healthy infected people who, within the incubation period, do not even suspect that they are infected.
I agree, our ancestors were not strong in microbiologists, but already quarantine measures were able to take. So this thesis does not pass.
Finally, the term is the term. "Device throwing stones", nothing more. Catapult - accurate translation from Latin: "Charger", nothing more.
And so everywhere! "Lito-Bola" from Greek: "Device throwing stones." Nowhere - neither hint for the use of some elastic elements. But after all, the cores of the first guns were completely stone! So?!
Let us allow myself a little remark.
All of the above should not be understood as if the guns appeared only in the middle of the XV century. Of course not. Just by this time, the high-quality growth of the power of artillery has reached such a level that the existence of traditional tired high walls has made impossible and unnecessary.
Guns with them too quickly straightened. At that moment, a qualitative leap in the development of fortification architecture was simply occurred.
The guns appeared much earlier, but to tear off the "traditional" walls they needed considerable time and monstrous consumption of ammunition.
At all, as Anglo-Franco-Turkish interventory near Sevastopol in 1855-1856: the story was repeated at a qualitatively new level.
And by the way, the middle of the XV century is in the accuracy of the capture of Constantinople by Suleiman magnificent, the huge role in which the siege guns played.
So after that, the fortific propertors were thoughtful: if such walls did not resist, then it is necessary to urgently invent something fundamentally new.
And the first were the Italians, as one of the closest candidates for the role of the object of the next Turkish Natius (see Yakovlev V.V. "Story of Fortresses").
General conclusion on Hochm number 2: No "antique", no "medieval" combat vehicles, the principle of operation of which is based on the use of some elastic elements, simply did not exist. There were only onions, crossbow ... and that's it.
Question: Where did they come from? In the sense, in the pictures - how now it becomes clear, the times of the Renaissance and later?
There is an opinion. It would be necessary to look close to the work of the genius artist / scientist / inventor Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519).
"Leonardo"
I wrote out, I wrote off the books in the Publishing House "Terra" and here I am awarded a "bonus" by the diligence - a free book. Called "World Leonardo".
Because the result turned out to be exactly the opposite, at least if the book is read, and not just flipping pictures.
It turns out that in 67 years of life of the genius worked as much as 12 paintings. Not thick for the classic, but it happens.
However, the "iron" belongs to the brushes da Vinci, only two of them: the "Joconda" urokomina, over which "Each cultural person" should be enthusiastic and "baptism", which even art historians are confusedly called the "inexplicable mistake of the Great Artist."
The belonging of the rest of the paintings is defined as follows: "On the authorship of Leonardo, an irrefutably indicates the predatory posture and elegant bending of a woman's hands ..."
This is about the portrait of Cecilia Galler, the mistress of the Duke Sofin. Argument, of course, irrefutable. That would turn around the mountain rustling and everything, and no longer Leonardo.
The rest is even more disadvantaged, still unintelligible. Yes, and "Joconda" ... My, of course, a personal opinion and I do not impose it to anyone, but I don't see anything out of a series of outstanding.
Doubtful charms woman with overwhelmed savoring mouth. In addition, their, at least eight - "Jocon" and all not signed. Why is the Louvree portrait belong to the brush "Great"?
"Baptism" is generally a full nightmare, if not to say, blasphemy.
You can depict John the Baptist, Teachers, Maker and Askta, just a young playful pedersist could only be a maestro, as she was, since she had been kept alone, then another badly smelling, sexual terms, magnate.
But he wrote Titan some fresco ("The Last Supper"). Well, I wrote, so I wrote that the ploit! That's just she immediately peelled and trembled. And nothing left, except for "amazing tones." After that, the frescoes more than once rewrote other artists.
Asks where Leonardo is here? Stucco, Say, is to blame.
Yes not plaster to blame, and titan, not knowingThat is obliged to know the painting of the 3rd category at the end of Proftechili: where you can already paint, and where it is still impossible, because it does not dry and what to be primed, so that in five minutes it was not falling off.
Throughout the book here and there in abundance scattered - open test! - Direct instructions on the fact that the maestro was lazy, was not able to organize his work, did not know and did not want.
Meanwhile, it has long been noticed that genius is 1% of talent and 99% sweat. Leonardo talent, apparently, was meant, just did not want to work with Korifey.
Nevertheless, there lived widely, only for old age I had to visit requests; He kept servants and horses (on medieval concepts, extremely expensive pleasure, a symbol of belonging to nobility!), allowed himself different broad gestures (which always require money).
Scratch: Pick up a cute boy, bought him pants and jackets ... The boy cradle from a matt of everything that neither getting up, and Master only sighed as well - continued to buy velvet pants ... until the very last sigh.
The picture is represented by repulsive, but for psychiatrists and sex patologists is quite familiar: the Pederaist lives on the dependency of the other, rich Pederest, for the sake of decency, it is numerical, imitates some kind of activity, but the money gets completely for other services.
"For the soul" contains a young pederastic, without demanding from him, in turn, anything noticeable work and the little weakness for him like kleptomania. Lives and gracious.
And under the curtain, this elderly deserved peddle does not particularly need anyone, because he has to take shade from Francis I (?). Teoror, you understand, Mutanadis.
And now it's time to look at the personality of Leonardo as a "scientist" and "inventor".
The basis for such statements became pictures, there and Syam scattered in handwritten treatises, take it in quotes, "Leonardo". No words, beautiful pictures. Some of them are even like drawings. But who peered in them?!
In my childhood, I also painted the schemes of different cosmols, submarines and six-legged tanks (Praise the Almighty, did not occur to anyone to bring these projects into metal). But this is not the reason to proclaim me ingenious inventor who won the time!
Again, I do not want to clutter the presentation: any, I repeat, any The "Leonardo" fiction suffers from unrelated disadvantage: it does not agree not that with the basic laws of physics, but even with the usual, everyday practical experience, which has any seven degree.
Genius clearly did not understand how power and mass, power, volume and pressure, and so on - along the entire Table C.
The genius clearly did not hold a real Arkebus in his hands, when it was designing its five-walled version: where to take so much health to spoke to such a weapon?!
Korife clearly did not imagine how much the armor and armament of his "tank" would be wearing, did not know what the real forces of those four people who should give this monster in motion, did not realize that this miracle of technology in the ground would take away, barely Having gone from a powerful road.
Titan flutter into the skies of fantasy, providing "black work" with all sorts of decartes with Pascals. Nerhai Torrichelli interpreted there, why the duke fountain does not fountain. Galilee, fool, kernels with the Pisa Tower drops, Scholyar. And here I am!
However, all "technical wonders" Leonardo is very well drawn. What is, that is, it is not to take it away. Pictures cute.
The so-called, "revival" is a surge of human arrogance, perhaps the first, but, unfortunately, not the last, when people imagined that science will allow them to overcome all obstacles and will soon give the opportunity to finally triumph over nature.
It is necessary only more axles, pulleys and gear. Something does not work? So, few gears.
Regrettable, but the fact. Beautifully discharged mechanisms "Leonardo" are inoperable. Beautifully painted balleys with catapults are obviously inoperable.
My opinion is such. Master lived just at the time when the artificial version of "antiquity" and "Middle Ages" began to form.
And so, the historians have a problem: they knew perfectly that guns and arkebuses appeared relatively recently. And in their version of the story, it was formed, so to say, "Military Technical Vacuum": And what replaced the ancient siege artillery?
And here some Titan flashed. Very suspect that Leonardo. Flashed - and historians picked up. Flashed - and we already have the fifth century the brains are powdered.
I do not know who Leonardo da Vinci is and as his real name, and whether he lived in general.
But I know that "antique" and "medieval" throwing machines were simply drawn on paper.
Biddenly drawn, it's true. And the first candidate for authorship is the one who in modern historiography is called "Leonardo da Vinci."
Tsar-gun - "Russian shotgun"
No, here is a honest word, solid and seemingly an intelligent magazine - "Technique - Youth."
But as soon as it comes to "Affairs for a long time coupled days, the presenters of the antiquity of the deep, "so badly acting in the role of the selection of the Fennikov Oaks.
About king-gun This printed organ spoke in the following way. They say, yes, folded in front of it with a neat pyramid of the nucleus - purely decorative.
Yes, indeed, a richly decorated cast iron casting machine is absolutely non-functional, and also purely decorative.
But, they say, this decorative cannon was intended for shooting, but not nuclei, but a "fraction" - a carriage, and from a wooden machine with a constant elevation angle.
Pardon, but it is nonsense at the level of the carpentine. Throw such a gun, in advance consciously eliminating the possibility of tipping over the angle of elevation, that is, in terms of range - it is nonsense. This is a savings.
In the thirties of the twentieth century, a certain genius by the name Tukhachevsky also hit such projects. I.V. Stalin showed truly angelic patience, explaining to the genius that even the fantasy of Marshal should have some borders, but, having exhausted the arguments and without achieving an understanding, was forced to spread apart forever forever and with a genius, and with his protege - Kurchevsky, Shrovsky and Otzh with them.
By the way, contrary to the current "democratic" fabrications, while the same Steochovsky engaged in a serious business (parachutes), he lived and graciously. I suffered in Debresi, - Do not be offended: the country of the Soviets is not so rich in order to finance your technical dislocations.
But, let's go back to our gun and take into account such a nuance: at all times, antspecturous guns, the main task of which is the maintenance of fire on self-defense, always had a small caliber, and the main demand for them was high rapidity.
Otherwise, they simply do not fulfill their combat task. The rapidity of the king gun - no more than one or two shots per hour. Thus, the "fractional" version disappears completely.
So maybe the nuclei is still real? Maybe we have a really siege tool of unheard of power? ..
No, everything is correct. Kernels - Boutaphoric. And to understand, finally, what is the case, it is necessary to put two photos: king-guns and some kind of reliably combat large-caliber cannon.
And everything becomes clear.
The insufficient strength of metals used to cast the stems forced the masters of the loafers to make the walls of the trunks of very thick, approximately commensurate with the actual caliber of the gun.
Meanwhile, in the picture the king cannons is excellent, it is clear that the thickness of the walls of her trunk is small to indecent - no more than a quarter of the caliber. 102% Warranty: It's simply ruin when trying to shoot the core.
The most interesting thing is that when shooting a booth, the same thing happens, since the mass of the cabinage charge is approximately equal, and even exceeds the mass of the solid nucleus for the same guns - see any reference book on smooth-bore artillery.
My conclusion and try to argue: we have the memorial of the glory of Russian weapons. Wonderful, but - only a memorial and nothing more. And in this regard, it would be curious to check two things directly, so to speak, "on the ground".
First, is there a trunk of the Herbal? These are such cylindrical horizontal tides in the middle part, due to which the barrel is carried out in the vertical plane. In the picture, the place where they should be covered with some decorative squeezes of the boiler.
Secondly, is there a seed opening in the treasury part of the trunk? By photos of this, naturally, also not define. If there is no one thing, the topic is closed and the future discussion is not subject to in principle, although personally is clear for me and so.
And the name of the catapults spread to all throwing machines with a torsion principle of action.
Encyclopedic YouTube.
-
1 / 5
In a narrow sense, which emerged from the Romans, the catapult denotes a two-decker torsion fighter, where, unlike the ballistanists, shooting the stones of the canopy, the sweep shells were launched along the nasal trajectory. Literally a word catapult, or on ancient Greek katameltes., translated as " against [κατα (kata)] shield [έέλτη (pelt)]" That is, the catapult is a weapon capable of punching the warrior protection at a distance. Plutarch reported as a certain questionnaire about a special iron armor capable of withstanding the shot of the catapult. Alexander Macedonsky, under the siege of Gaza, was seriously injured in the arrow's shoulder from the catapult, which pierced the shield and shell. Alexander himself applied catapults in the field battle. Although the number of catapult was not big, they had a strong psychological impact On the enemy:
« Machines for this sign began to throw the arrows in the Scythians, which rushed on horseback on the shore. Some were injured; One arrow struck the shield and shell, and he fell from a horse. Scythians were afraid of arrows flying at such a long distance, and the fact that the hero of them was killed, and moved away a little from the shore.»
Such a felt was also called eutiton At the Greeks (that is, shooting horizontally, although sometimes the authors interpret the value of the Greek word as an element of the construct of the Fight) as opposed to palintononu (shooting a charter), also scorpio Romans. In the wider sense of the catapult, all kinds of antique throwing machines were denoted by the Greeks and later authors. Diodor (17.26), telling about the siege of Galicarnas in 334 BC. e. Mention of catapults shooting darts. However, in the story about the siege of Tira Diodor, the term is more widely used:
« Alexander installed the stone catapults in the appropriate places and forced the walls to shudder from the boulders, which they are metali. With the help of contractors on the wooden towers, he maintained a constant shelling with all types of shells and caused a heavy damage to the protectors of the walls.»
At the Greeks, the word of the catapult indicated just throwing weaponsAnd by the word of the catapult they added another word, denoting the type of projectile (arrow or stone). At the Romans, the meaning of the word of the catapult acquired a completely defined meaning. Ancient Roman author I. BC e. Vitruvius clearly refers the catapult to the fifth machines, and the ballists to the type of stone stamps.
Catapult invention
Catapult shoots on the flooring path with relatively light arrows, providing high accuracy of hit; Ballist is designed to defeat group purposes by the method of canopy, that is, at a high elevation angle, to send a heavy projectile as far as possible. From messages of antique authors, it can be concluded that from the catapults managed to be aimed at hitting single people in a large range.
Some details on the device of the catapult, calling them by Balistraces, leads to the Earniewiczantine (c.) The author of the procurement Caesarian: the guide is made of the iron bar; The arrow is embedded in a wetted wooden block, which is driven by a guide.
« When from this car, they want to shoot in the enemies, then, stretching with a short rope, are forced to be bending the wooden parts, which are the edges of the onions, and the pads put an arrow in length in half of those arms that are stuck out of ordinary onions, and more in four times. Feathers, like ordinary arrows, they are not equipped, but instead of feathers they have thin wooden plates, and appearance They are completely similar to the arrow. A sharp tip is attached to it, very large and corresponding to its thickness; Standing on both sides using some devices with a great strengthen the theater, and then the extended block, moving forward, throws out and with such force, throws the arrow that its flight is equal to a minimum of a double arrow flight from a simple bow.»
In the work of Athena Mechanics, the author of the I century, cited the achievements of an ancient Greek engineer of Agsemistratus, who sent a 70-cm arrow (the smallest caliber of the fifth) by 3 and a half stage, that is, for 600 m, and the heavy catapult sent an arrow at 177 cm for 700 m.
The German artillery officer of the scramx at the beginning of the 20th century built and experienced antique throwing machines. He managed to reject the 88-cm arrow of the catapult constructed in accordance with the description of Vitruvia, 370 m. These arrows pierced the wooden shield with a thickness of 3 cm, upholstered with iron, and penetrated half of its length
Today we will talk about one of the four oldest siege gunsabout the catapult! Catapult (Greek. καταπέλτης, lat. Tormentum, Catapulta) - Greek term, whichdenotes any metamachine. The catapult is one of the most famous siege guns. At the Greeks, the word of the catapult indicated just throwing weapons, and by the word of the catapult they added another word, denoting the treatment of the projectile (arrow or stone). At the Romans, the meaning of the word of the catapult acquired a completely defined meaning. Ancient Roman author I. BC e. Vitruvius clearly refers the catapult to the fifth machines, and the ballists to the type of stone stamps.
Ancient Roman historian Polybiy wrote about 7 tons of hair sent by the allies in a precipitated synop for the manufacture of catapult. It was used by horse hair, but in the case of the extreme needs of the torsions spilled out of female hair. Mostly throwing machines were used in the siege of cities. When Scipipion took a new Carthage in Spain, then he captured there 75 baller and 400 catapult. Apparently due to the wider spread of the runs, the name of the catapult passed on all types of throwing machines.
The Roman felt, referred to as the late Empire of the carballestone, as it was installed on the wagon.
However, during the late Roman Empire, the races began to call the ballists, and since then the confusion reigns - often the ballists are called the races (catapults), and on the contrary, they call the onagrov-like camplows. According to the author of the IV century, the 55 caroballist consisted in the standard armament of the Roman legion, which were nothing but mounted on the wagon!The invention of the catapult!
Diodoruse attributes the invention of the catapults in 399 BC. e. Syracuse Tiran Donia I, who gathered artisans in Syracuses (in Sicily) so that they produced modern weapons in the fight against enemies. Dionysius ((διονύσιος) - Syracuse Tiran in 405-367 BC, famous for his inhuman cruelty) I gave out artisans a high salary, generously gone and invited to the table, and those in responses created a catapults different speciesMassed Armor Kits, built new powerful types of cheering vessels. Already in 397 BC. e. Dionysius applied the races (or rather catapult) from the shore against the Carthage ships. New Greek weapons caused good hit And considerable losses had a great psychological effect on Carthaginian.
Sometimes the statement is found that the first catapults are depicted on the Assyrian bas-reliefs of the IX century. BC e. From the nitrogen, but on bas-reliefs from throwing equipment, only the patros and bows are shown. In the Encyclopedic Book on the author's Assyrian Rawlinson "The Seven Great Monarchies of The Ancient Easter Great Monarchies of the Ancient Eastern World" is given an image of a fabrication from a bas-relief, which, according to the author, resembles a diverse of the catapult, but it is difficult to agree with such an interpretation of the image.
The Bible attributes the invention of the catapult of the Hebrew King of Ozia in the VIII century. BC E.: "In Jerusalem, Osia made cars that were invented by smart people. These cars stood on the towers and on the corners of the walls. Machines metal arrows and large stones. " German historian Dils suggested that the author lived approximately about 300 BC. e. And he added the modern technique of the Hellenistic era in the preceding period. Confirmations on the existence of a catapult to the IV century. BC e. From the part of written sources or archaeological certificates has not been received.Operating principle
Further to the design will go part of the boring theory that you can skip:
To pinch a stone or a large arrow in the distance, you must first stock, and then dramatically release energy. This can be done in three ways: stretching fibers, twisting tendons and using counterweight.
Unlike onions, where kinetic energy is provided by the elasticity of the bent arm of the bow, in the catapults and the ballots, the energy is stored in twisted beams (harnesses) of low-elastic fibers. The lever inserted by one end into the twisted harness seeks to unwind, accelerating the other end of the lever to high speed. In this way, each shoulder of the catapult consists of a horizontal lever inserted into the shiny with a certain force harness, as well as the base or frame, where the harness is vertically attached. Both shoulders of the catapult are connected to the guide, to delay that only with the winch is possible. Between the levers, the guide beam is installed for the directional flight of a throwing projectile: a stone in a ballist and arrows in a catapult.
IN design It includes: lever 2 with a trigger 6 and prance 3. The lever is mounted in a beam of twisted fibers 5, which are pulled up using a special arrangement on the platform 1. Also on the platform installed a locking beam 4.These throwing machines were used in Ancient Rome and Greece with siege and defense of fortresses. Of these, metal stones, barrels with an incendiary mixture, etc.
General
In a narrow sense, which emerged from the Romans, the catapult denotes a two-decker torsion fighter, where, unlike the ballistanists, shooting the stones of the canopy, the sweep shells were launched along the nasal trajectory. Literally a word catapult, or on ancient Greek katameltes., translated as " against [κατα (kata)] shield [έέλτη (pelt)]" That is, the catapult is a weapon capable of punching the warrior protection at a distance. Plutarch reported as a certain questionnaire about a special iron armor capable of withstanding the shot of the catapult. Alexander Macedonsky, under the siege of Gaza, was seriously injured in the arrow's shoulder from the catapult, which pierced the shield and shell. Alexander himself applied catapults in the field battle. Although the number of catapult was not large, they had a strong psychological impact on the enemy:
« Machines for this sign began to throw the arrows in the Scythians, which rushed on horseback on the shore. Some were injured; One arrow struck the shield and shell, and he fell from a horse. Scythians were afraid of arrows flying at such a long distance, and the fact that the hero of them was killed, and moved away a little from the shore.»
Such a felt was also called eutiton At the Greeks (that is, shooting horizontally, although sometimes the authors interpret the value of the Greek word as an element of the construct of the Fight) as opposed to palintononu (shooting a charter), also scorpio Romans. In the wider sense of the catapult, all kinds of antique throwing machines were denoted by the Greeks and later authors. Diodor (17.26), telling about the siege of Galicarnas in 334 BC. e. Mention of catapults shooting darts. However, in the story about the siege of Tira Diodor, the term is more widely used:
« Alexander installed the stone catapults in the appropriate places and forced the walls to shudder from the boulders, which they are metali. With the help of contractors on the wooden towers, he supported the constant shelling with all types of shells and caused a heavy damage to the protectors of the walls.»
At the Greeks, the word of the catapult indicated just throwing weapons, and by the word of the catapult they added another word, denoting the treatment of the projectile (arrow or stone). At the Romans, the meaning of the word of the catapult acquired a completely defined meaning. Ancient Roman author I. BC e. Vitruvius clearly refers the catapult to the fifth machines, and the ballists to the type of stone stamps.
Catapult invention
Catapult shoots on the flooring path with relatively light boosters, ensuring high accuracy of hit; Ballist is designed to defeat group purposes by a canopy, that is, under a high elevation angle, to send a heavy projectile as far as possible. From messages of antique authors, it can be concluded that from the catapults managed to be aimed at hitting single people in a large range.
Arm tips for catapult from 4 to 7 cm (III-I centuries. BC.)
Some details on the device of the catapult, calling them by Balistraces, leads to the Earniewiczantine (c.) The author of the procurement Caesarian: the guide is made of the iron bar; The arrow is embedded in a wetted wooden block, which is driven by a guide.
« When from this car, they want to shoot in the enemies, then, stretching with a short rope, are forced to be bending the wooden parts, which are the edges of the onions, and the pads put an arrow in length in half of those arms that are stuck out of ordinary onions, and more in four times. Feathers, like ordinary arrows, they are not equipped, but instead of feathers they have thin wooden plates, and in appearance they are completely similar to the arrow. A sharp tip is attached to it, very large and corresponding to its thickness; Standing on both sides using some devices with a great strengthen the theater, and then the extended block, moving forward, throws out and with such force, throws the arrow that its flight is equal to a minimum of a double arrow flight from a simple bow.»
In the work of Athena Mechanics, the author of the I century, cited the achievements of an ancient Greek engineer of Agsemistratus, who sent a 70-cm arrow (the smallest caliber of the fifth) by 3 and a half stage, that is, for 600 m, and the heavy catapult sent an arrow at 177 cm for 700 m.
The German artillery officer of the scramx at the beginning of the 20th century built and experienced antique throwing machines. He managed to reject the 88-cm arrow of the catapult constructed in accordance with the description of the Vitruvia, 370 m. These arrows pierced the wooden shield with a thickness of 3 cm, upholstered with iron, and penetrated half of its length. According to published information from other enthusiasts for arrows from 0.7 to 1.2 m long, it was possible to achieve a range of 300 m.
Modern catapults
Currently, the catapults are used to launch shells and aircraft with aircraft carriers. Developments are underway to create a catapult to launch cargo spacecraft from the surface of the planets. Launching manned ships is not possible due to too much acceleration for a living organism.
The following types of modern catapult distinguish:
- Hydraulic catapult - used to launch aircraft with aircraft carriers until 1950.
- Steam catapult - currently applied in artillery and air force. The shell or aircraft accelerates under the action of a compressed vapor-gas mixture.
- Electromagnetic catapult - undergoing tests in the US Air Force. It is also possible in the future will be used to launch cargo spacecraft from the surface of the planets. The object is accelerated under the influence of an electromagnetic field.
- Railotron is a variety of electromagnetic catapult.
Notes
Links
- About the catapults, an article from the magazine "Technique-Youth" №10 (1979) on the site xlegio.ru
- , de Architectura., Book X, 10-12 - Ancient Roman author I century. BC e. About throwing machines
- Catapult (eng.). - In Smith "S Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities. - Overview article in English about throwing machines based on antique primary sources
- Tormentum, a dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities (1890) (EDS. William Smith) is the most complete review article in English about throwing machines based on antique primary sources
Throwing machines Antiquity Ballista · Castrakes · Catapult · Carroballist · Oxybel · ONGR · Polyball · Scorpio 
Middle Ages Crossbow · Machine Crossbow · Arkbalist · Wantravudhan · Mangonel · Medieval ONGR · Plok · Siforoform · Testing Springld · Testing Springld · Required · Cho-Co-well · Einarm Categories:
- Alphabetic weapons
- Alphabetic Machines
- Torsion throwing machines
- Kamnechi
- Fights
- History of arms
- Antique weapon
- Military equipment of ancient Rome
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.
Synonyms:General
In a narrow sense, which emerged from the Romans, the catapult denotes a two-decker torsion fighter, where, unlike the ballistanists, shooting the stones of the canopy, the sweep shells were launched along the nasal trajectory. Literally a word catapult, or on ancient Greek katameltes., translated as " against [κατα (kata)] shield [έέλτη (pelt)]" That is, the catapult is a weapon capable of punching the warrior protection at a distance. Plutarch reported as a certain questionnaire about a special iron armor capable of withstanding the shot of the catapult. Alexander Macedonsky, under the siege of Gaza, was seriously injured in the arrow's shoulder from the catapult, which pierced the shield and shell. Alexander himself applied catapults in the field battle. Although the number of catapult was not large, they had a strong psychological impact on the enemy:
« Machines for this sign began to throw the arrows in the Scythians, which rushed on horseback on the shore. Some were injured; One arrow struck the shield and shell, and he fell from a horse. Scythians were afraid of arrows flying at such a long distance, and the fact that the hero of them was killed, and moved away a little from the shore.»
Such a felt was also called eutiton At the Greeks (that is, shooting horizontally, although sometimes the authors interpret the value of the Greek word as an element of the construct of the Fight) as opposed to palintononu (shooting a charter), also scorpio Romans. In the wider sense of the catapult, all kinds of antique throwing machines were denoted by the Greeks and later authors. Diodor (17.26), telling about the siege of Galicarnas in 334 BC. e. Mention of catapults shooting darts. However, in the story about the siege of Tira Diodor, the term is more widely used:
« Alexander installed the stone catapults in the appropriate places and forced the walls to shudder from the boulders, which they are metali. With the help of contractors on the wooden towers, he supported the constant shelling with all types of shells and caused a heavy damage to the protectors of the walls.»
At the Greeks, the word of the catapult indicated just throwing weapons, and by the word of the catapult they added another word, denoting the treatment of the projectile (arrow or stone). At the Romans, the meaning of the word of the catapult acquired a completely defined meaning. Ancient Roman author I. BC e. Vitruvius clearly refers the catapult to the fifth machines, and the ballists to the type of stone stamps.
Catapult invention
Catapult shoots on the flooring path with relatively light boosters, ensuring high accuracy of hit; Ballist is designed to defeat group purposes by a canopy, that is, under a high elevation angle, to send a heavy projectile as far as possible. From messages of antique authors, it can be concluded that from the catapults managed to be aimed at hitting single people in a large range.
Arm tips for catapult from 4 to 7 cm (III-I centuries. BC.)
Some details on the device of the catapult, calling them by Balistraces, leads to the Earniewiczantine (c.) The author of the procurement Caesarian: the guide is made of the iron bar; The arrow is embedded in a wetted wooden block, which is driven by a guide.
« When from this car, they want to shoot in the enemies, then, stretching with a short rope, are forced to be bending the wooden parts, which are the edges of the onions, and the pads put an arrow in length in half of those arms that are stuck out of ordinary onions, and more in four times. Feathers, like ordinary arrows, they are not equipped, but instead of feathers they have thin wooden plates, and in appearance they are completely similar to the arrow. A sharp tip is attached to it, very large and corresponding to its thickness; Standing on both sides using some devices with a great strengthen the theater, and then the extended block, moving forward, throws out and with such force, throws the arrow that its flight is equal to a minimum of a double arrow flight from a simple bow.»
In the work of Athena Mechanics, the author of the I century, cited the achievements of an ancient Greek engineer of Agsemistratus, who sent a 70-cm arrow (the smallest caliber of the fifth) by 3 and a half stage, that is, for 600 m, and the heavy catapult sent an arrow at 177 cm for 700 m.
The German artillery officer of the scramx at the beginning of the 20th century built and experienced antique throwing machines. He managed to reject the 88-cm arrow of the catapult constructed in accordance with the description of the Vitruvia, 370 m. These arrows pierced the wooden shield with a thickness of 3 cm, upholstered with iron, and penetrated half of its length. According to published information from other enthusiasts for arrows from 0.7 to 1.2 m long, it was possible to achieve a range of 300 m.
Modern catapults
Currently, the catapults are used to launch shells and aircraft with aircraft carriers. Developments are underway to create a catapult to launch cargo spacecraft from the surface of the planets. Launching manned ships is not possible due to too much acceleration for a living organism.
The following types of modern catapult distinguish:
- Hydraulic catapult - used to launch aircraft with aircraft carriers until 1950.
- Steam catapult - currently applied in artillery and air force. The shell or aircraft accelerates under the action of a compressed vapor-gas mixture.
- Electromagnetic catapult - undergoing tests in the US Air Force. It is also possible in the future will be used to launch cargo spacecraft from the surface of the planets. The object is accelerated under the influence of an electromagnetic field.
- Railotron is a variety of electromagnetic catapult.
Notes
Links
- About the catapults, an article from the magazine "Technique-Youth" №10 (1979) on the site xlegio.ru
- , de Architectura., Book X, 10-12 - Ancient Roman author I century. BC e. About throwing machines
- Catapult (eng.). - In Smith "S Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities. - Overview article in English about throwing machines based on antique primary sources
- Tormentum, a dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities (1890) (EDS. William Smith) is the most complete review article in English about throwing machines based on antique primary sources
Throwing machines Antiquity Ballista · Castrakes · Catapult · Carroballist · Oxybel · ONGR · Polyball · Scorpio Middle Ages Crossbow · Machine Crossbow · Arkbalist · Wantravudhan · Mangonel · Medieval ONGR · Plok · Siforoform · Testing Springld · Testing Springld · Required · Cho-Co-well · Einarm Categories:
- Alphabetic weapons
- Alphabetic Machines
- Torsion throwing machines
- Kamnechi
- Fights
- History of arms
- Antique weapon
- Military equipment of ancient Rome
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.
Synonyms: