|
Post by howler on Feb 9, 2018 2:18:06 GMT
Well, being I don't have propellers and such in front of me, I'll just stick with the pencil, ruler, stick, whatever and stretch out my arms. Why would you choose an exponentially more difficult illustration model? Just stick out your arm and give my example a thumbs down (like a diseased Roman emperor condemning my though experiment to death). Then...WHAM...you'll get it...like everyone else on the forum except yourself. I condemned your thought experiment in a separate thread but you still don't seem to get it. Now you are fly swatting the guy next to you, or your own arm. Nonetheless, you had to impart energy to do so. When Keating offers a disarm buy rolling around the opponents arm, presenting his edge to the other's arm, he is doing so with the base of a blade. That is the only, lateral/horizontal view you are sharing with your current presentation. In a forward and linear path to your opponent with your flyswatter, you are really only offering a jab that might be easily avoided. Since the distance and time was lost as you rooster/reset your flyswatter, the shorter blade has actually entered your measure because it didn't have to travel as far while its point was directed at you. You rooster/reset while I move forward. You let fly again and I still have my distance/reach when I retreat to move out of your jab. I am not arguing the geometry. nor momentum, velocity and mass of your claymore; simply that a shorter and lighter blade is quicker. Your only advantage is the initial reach and perhaps keeping that distance. Yes, a shorter blade must then accelerate a double measure to reach the same distance. That all goes back to energy expended . Pretty simple to me. Even if I'm living in my own private Idaho. Your over thinking. The weight (POB) is at the guard, so no meaningful weight penalty (you aren't using an axe, or even a neutral bar rod), though significant length advantage is potentially HUGE, which also increases impact damage due to velocity. Small knives are only advantageous in certain elements of the grapple (and our beloved phone booth).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2018 2:19:24 GMT
Enjoy
|
|
|
Post by howler on Feb 9, 2018 2:23:43 GMT
Enjoy IMMENSELY. In fact, I'm whacking myself silly with a flyswatter as I type these words...and leaving red welts.
|
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on Feb 9, 2018 2:24:22 GMT
Maybe this will shed some light on tip speed. It’s been 60 years since I took physics and although I remember the problem I don’t remember the formula. However below is a simple graph that will demonstrate the tip velocity increases with length. Let line YZ represent a blade. The blade pivots at Z. Let line XZ represent the base line for a lack of a better word. Moving Y to X all points on line YZ will contact line XZ at the same time. Lines AA and BB are random points along the blade AA being farther from Z than B. AA representing a longer blade compared to BB. As AA contacts XZ at the same time as BB and travels the greater distance AA has to have more velocity than BB. So much for theory. Now whether one is man enough to swing the longer blade???
|
|
|
Post by howler on Feb 9, 2018 3:36:11 GMT
Maybe this will shed some light on tip speed. It’s been 60 years since I took physics and although I remember the problem I don’t remember the formula. However below is a simple graph that will demonstrate the tip velocity increases with length. Let line YZ represent a blade. The blade pivots at Z. Let line XZ represent the base line for a lack of a better word. Moving Y to X all points on line YZ will contact line XZ at the same time. Lines AA and BB are random points along the blade AA being farther from Z than B. AA representing a longer blade compared to BB. As AA contacts XZ at the same time as BB and travels the greater distance AA has to have more velocity than BB. So much for theory. Now whether one is man enough to swing the longer blade??? And if the weight is mainly at the pivot point (Z), it (time loss due to greater weight) is a negligible factor compared to the advantage of tip distance traveled (or tip velocity gained, depending on how you want to look at it). And the losses due to weight penalty are minimal, as your arm is not twice as slow because you have a 20oz object in your hand vs. a 10oz object. Flyswatter effect. Hallelujah and praise the Lord.
|
|
|
Post by MOK on Feb 9, 2018 4:56:19 GMT
IME, how fast the tip of the weapon moves in a strike doesn't actually matter in this particular regard, as such. A longer weapon is "faster" because it can reach the enemy sooner, not because it literally moves faster (which is entirely possible, just not entirely relevant).
Remember, time and distance are interchangeable.
|
|
|
Post by howler on Feb 9, 2018 5:00:13 GMT
IME, how fast the tip of the weapon moves in a strike doesn't actually matter in this particular regard, as such. A longer weapon is "faster" because it can reach the enemy sooner, not because it literally moves faster (which is entirely possible, just not entirely relevant). Remember, time and distance are interchangeable. Of course, the hand is quicker than the feet, as being able to hit someone without moving the feet is one giant advantage. After footwork (the body) you reach the enemy sooner due to the reach, but also because of the velocity of the tip (which you agree is entirely possible), so it must matter to some degree. Reach and time are (as you said) interchangeable, as one gives meaning to the other.
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Feb 9, 2018 10:02:20 GMT
I'm still of the mind that a heavier weapon is a heavier weapon, regardless where it balances it still needs to be moved. I have quite a few "fighting knives" in my own collection but none of them balance at the guard, must a few inches out, the Fairbairn-Sykes an inch below. That one's not a slicer, though, like the others. I will also say I've agreed all along that tip speed is not the most important trait of a fighting knife. Sure, it's something; keeping that point on the other guy across evasion, party, whatever, but maybe I'm just the kind who pieces to neutralize all movement before it matters too much. Only ever had a knife pulled on me a handful of times, and managed to have it out of the other person's hands within a second or two each time. Without using a knife, myself. Granted, those were a long time ago... Maybe the chef knife wasn't big enough.
|
|
|
Post by MOK on Feb 9, 2018 12:27:05 GMT
Of course, the hand is quicker than the feet, as being able to hit someone without moving the feet is one giant advantage. After footwork (the body) you reach the enemy sooner due to the reach, but also because of the velocity of the tip (which you agree is entirely possible), so it must matter to some degree. Reach and time are (as you said) interchangeable, as one gives meaning to the other. A longer weapon reaches the opponent with a smaller/faster movement of the feet, too.
|
|
|
Post by MOK on Feb 9, 2018 12:48:35 GMT
I'm still of the mind that a heavier weapon is a heavier weapon, regardless where it balances it still needs to be moved. Although, after a certain point, being lighter just doesn't matter - there's an inherent limit to how fast the human hand and arm can move, regardless of how little extra weight they carry. Huh. Interesting observation, that... I've been in some situations one might reasonably term "knife fights", and always gotten out unscathed, but never with a knife myself. (Mostly because it's plain illegal to carry out in public a blade large enough to be of any defensive use, up here, I suppose.)
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Feb 9, 2018 14:16:33 GMT
Fair point, MOK, but still no sense putting more weight where it needn't be if you don't have to.
I've never gotten a clear answer on legal limits to knives where I am, though it is 3.5" for folding knives. Mine is still 4", don't tell.
I just feel, regardless of the likelihood of encountering the old Mexican standoff or whatever, I can't move around comfortably with anything over 7" and I'm not gonna bother carrying anything that big for any reason. Not every day, anyway.
|
|
christain
Member
It's the steel on the inside that counts.
Posts: 2,835
|
Post by christain on Feb 9, 2018 17:45:17 GMT
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Feb 9, 2018 18:24:03 GMT
Cream puffs are usually the ones to pull the big knives. They feel better about themselves that way. But nah, I got lucky in my few cases. I'm a bit of a cream puff, myself.
|
|
christain
Member
It's the steel on the inside that counts.
Posts: 2,835
|
Post by christain on Feb 9, 2018 19:02:07 GMT
Big Bowies have just always been a thing in Texas. We're not trying to prove anything....We already have. Boo-yah!
|
|
|
Post by MOK on Feb 9, 2018 19:27:42 GMT
In all honesty, the likelihood of ever being accosted by a non-amateur knife fighter seems vanishingly small... to put it generously. (Of course, being fall down drunk and/or drop dead stupid won't do 'em any favors, either. That I've never been mugged successfully speaks more to the level of professionalism among local thug wannabes than to my personal badassity. )
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Feb 9, 2018 20:59:49 GMT
Like MOK says, the folk most likely to pull a knife aren't exactly the most likely to be particularly versed in the various schools of fighting or even have any real experience any further than "pointy end goes into the other guy" and probably won't be sober, either.
That's not to say they're not dangerous, but they're less dangerous then they could be if they knew what they were doing.
|
|
|
Post by howler on Feb 9, 2018 21:04:52 GMT
I'm still of the mind that a heavier weapon is a heavier weapon, regardless where it balances it still needs to be moved. I have quite a few "fighting knives" in my own collection but none of them balance at the guard, must a few inches out, the Fairbairn-Sykes an inch below. That one's not a slicer, though, like the others. I will also say I've agreed all along that tip speed is not the most important trait of a fighting knife. Sure, it's something; keeping that point on the other guy across evasion, party, whatever, but maybe I'm just the kind who pieces to neutralize all movement before it matters too much. Only ever had a knife pulled on me a handful of times, and managed to have it out of the other person's hands within a second or two each time. Without using a knife, myself. Granted, those were a long time ago... Maybe the chef knife wasn't big enough. The heavier weight of a knife is almost non relevant. 6oz weight vs. 12oz weight (equal POB) is no big deal. I don't know what the MOST important trait of a fighting knife is (another good subject) but a 12" blade has a HUUUUUUUGE advantage over a 6"...including over twice the tip speed...flyswatter effect strikes again.
|
|
|
Post by howler on Feb 9, 2018 21:17:07 GMT
Fair point, MOK, but still no sense putting more weight where it needn't be if you don't have to. I've never gotten a clear answer on legal limits to knives where I am, though it is 3.5" for folding knives. Mine is still 4", don't tell. I just feel, regardless of the likelihood of encountering the old Mexican standoff or whatever, I can't move around comfortably with anything over 7" and I'm not gonna bother carrying anything that big for any reason. Not every day, anyway. Legality and comfort, not to mention the logic of carrying a firearm instead of a honking foot and a half by pound and a half hunk of blade are extremely compelling reasons to have a (say) Spyderco Delica in the trousers.
|
|
|
Post by howler on Feb 9, 2018 21:23:27 GMT
Im(personal)o, the CS bowie machete comes pretty close to an ideal “self-defense-knife” (I’m pretty sure there were times and places for that). It’s light enough to not tire you out too fast and turns corners quickly. It has a well shaped handle, suiting many grips. It's fairly slender, but wide in the blade. No guard to snag on things, no unnecessary weight. It has plenty enough chopping power, imo, and is long and hefty enough to parry bigger weapons, yet light enough to counter, parry or evade lighter blades. It gives you reach and develops great momentum, without being too cumbersome and/or slow in the shorter strikes. It’s light enough to feint well, and to attack with speed and precision. Its length is a perfect compromise for carrying, drawing and fighting in different situations and varying measures. The blade is shaped to harm in all directions, cuts, chops and stabs pretty much equally well. It’s a little bit lighter than the famous Forrest Bowie, for example, but most likely has the pob a bit further out (too close a pob and chopping cuts won’t work well – then having a pommel helps, which in turn increases the weight of the weapon and demands a more loose resp. subtle grip on the weapon, which is not always a good thing because it can have you losing the weapon). The Forrest Bowie is distal tapered and flat ground (an advantage regarding cutting penetration) and probably around two ounces heavier than the CS machete. Then again, James Bowie surely was a better fighter and a stronger man than me, so I’m pretty fine with the CS machete. Owning a nice repro of the Forrest Bowie would still be quite awesome... www.badlands-forum.de/t1604f4-quot-Edwin-Forrest-quot-Bowie-Replika-von-Achim-Wirtz.htmlNot to be confused with the CS Black Bear machete, I assume? The other might be easier to carry, but that Black Bear looks amazing...in fact YOU may have been the one who picked my interest.
|
|
|
Post by howler on Feb 9, 2018 21:25:07 GMT
When in Texas, go BIG or go HOME. Pull that thing while saying "walk on home boy".
|
|