h a l f b a k e r yOn the one hand, true. On the other hand, bollocks.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
Ship Saw
A variation and competitor to the skipping disk catapult | |
This would be a stone disk launched in a vertical orientation at an oncoming trireme or other ancient invading ship. Rather than skipping across the water, it would roll towards the target being kept afloat by logs attached around the perimeter. Picture a paddle wheel from an old river boat made of a
stone disk with only the outside being the floaty part.
I'd like to enter this design as a competitor to the skipping catapult if there's ever such a competition. I would propose that my variation would be more accurate due to the elimination of the bouncing and would cut the ships in half when they hit.
Inspired by this
Skipping_20sidearm_20catapult
When I grow up, I'd like to build both, test them against each other and make a documentary of the whole thing [doctorremulac3, Sep 25 2011]
[link]
|
| |
Um. I could be wrong but I think you need more surface area in order to skip or roll on top of the water. This will sink and slow down very quickly. |
|
| |
We suspect that the spinning disk is actually held clear of the water; in not, you are correct, drag will quickly stop it unless there is a substantial external power input. |
|
| |
Well, the logs would be just long enough to supply the necessary surface area to keep the thing afloat and vertical. Remember, it's spinning very fast, and unlike the Wallace bomb, it's spinning in the direction of travel so the spin you impart to it would help it "roll" to some extent. The downward movment of the logs on the leading edge would act to lift the unit above the water as it rolled as well. I'd think a foot wide, six foot tall stone disk might have 3 foot long logs placed every couple of feet around the perimeter. |
|
| |
As for a 3 ton stone disk traveling at 60 miles an hour bouncing off the side of a ship because of it's got logs acting as bumpers, I don't see that happening. |
|
| |
But it's this controversy that would make for a great reality show. The thing burning down, falling over and sinking into the swamp would be just as entertaining as it cutting a 3/4 scale ancient Roman warship in half. |
|
| |
A trireme, when ramming without intent to board,
doesn't aim for the hull, but rather to shear along
one side, shattering oars and maiming the oarsmen*.
The same principle would apply here. Against
ancient oared warships the rolling
disk needn't cut anything, nor strike the hull. |
|
| |
*Not sure where I read this. Probably something by
Gene Wolfe. |
|
| |
The rolling/floating business probably won't work. You'd be giving up all of the skipping across water advantages for a whole lot of floats, most of which aren't in use at any time. They would act as bumpers, probably, and might make the whole wheel just roll up and over the ship. |
|
| |
I'd make a stone disk, put some interesting lifting shapes around the rim, and spin it backward when I fired it out. That way you'd get the skipping business working twice as fast, and when it hit a ship, it would dig in and go downward, making some under the waterline damage. |
|
| |
I don't think several tons of stone hitting the ship hard enough to get airborn is going to leave that ship in floating condition. But if it's a clean cut you want, you could move the float logs a couple of feet in from the edge of the stone towards the center. Then they'd act like more of a floating axle.Then by the time the float logs hit the hull, the stone has already penetrated a couple of feet in. |
|
| |
Like the backspin idea to make it go down though. I picture that actually lifting the ship up and cutting through the keel rendering 2 half ships out of 1 with a single shot. |
|
| |
Don't know if it would work or not, but no other ancient weapon could split a ship in two like that. I'm thinking a fortress lined with these would probably be left alone. |
|
| |
Oh yea, and I'd soak them with Greek fire juice and light 'em before launch just for effect. |
|
| |
I don't think you could get the stone disc moving
fast enough using ancient technology. Now days
we could simply use a motor to impart this speed
but there are few triremes to destroy it. |
|
| |
Also, as noted earlier, there is a limit to the buoyancy you can achieve without a formal hull to
displace sufficient water. Each log out of the
water become an extra weight that has to
compensated for so lengthening the log's won't
work - it is the ratio of buoyant logs to burden logs
that counts, even ignoring the weight of the
stone. |
|
| |
However it is an interesting idea and I would love
to have seen such devices used in the Ancient
World. |
|
| |
Well, there's one thing about this idea that's
intriguing. I think it would scale pretty accurately,
that is, you could make a small model that would
behave enough like a scaled up version to
test the concept. |
|
| |
As for getting the speed up, if twisted ropes and
such aren't enough, I was thinking of rolling these
down a ramp or even the side of a cliff. Perhaps
you could have 6 or 7 ramps going down the side
of a cliff aimed in different directions. If the cliff
were high enough, you might be able to get these
things going 100 miles per hour or so. |
|
| |
I envision this as a floating wheel that rolls along the water. The only parallel I can envision are attempts, during float trips, to roll an unoccupied inner tube across an expanse of river such that it rolls onto an occupied tube. It is hard to roll an inner tube any distance across the water, and inner tubes are largely above the surface. Maybe they are not going fast enough / not firm enough. |
|
| |
However if you watch something rolling through water, or ride a bike at speed thru a puddle, you will be impressed by how much water moves as well - water that is drawn up by the passage of the wheel (low pressure next to moving surface?) and flung off circumferentially, but especially onto your back if you are riding the bike. Moving that water drinks kinetic energy. |
|
| |
Yea, thought of that too. This thing would throw up a pretty huge "rooster tail" as they call it in speed boating. |
|
| |
That would sap lots of energy but it would certainly add to the show. Especially if the thing was on fire as well. |
|
| |
It's down to an issue of range. How far can you roll a 6 ton stone wheel on the water using logs placed around the perimeter or center? You'd probably be pretty safe saying "Not very" but you never know until you try. |
|
| |
Maybe one could mount sails on either side of the axle and sail the rolling wheel around. You could roll it thru one trireme after another, then take it up along the beach to roll thru the ones that thought they would be safe if they pulled up out of the water. Sort of a bronze age amphibious assault vehicle. |
|
| |
Sounds like it would be picturesque at least. |
|
| |
I feel like there's a definate calling for a show called "Modern DaVincis" where people come up with stuff DaVinci might have invented using the materials and technology of the day. |
|
| |
A waterborn version of their Buzzsaw from Emperor Battle for Dune. The Harkonnen like. |
|
| |
I'm thinking that even if some of these things didn't work in real life they'd make for great movie props. |
|
| |
The Wild Wild West meets Pirates of the Caribbean perhaps. |
|
| |
The words 'great pandjandrum' spring to mind... |
|
| |
A certain kind of mind, yes. |
|
| |