08-09-2009, 12:47 AM
Sorry, I have read conflicting reports from different sources. It was my understanding that a Scorpion was so named because it fired long darts up at a steep angle and while falling to the ground pinned men to the ground like a bug on a pin. A one armed throwing device (kicking mule or ass) is an onager? My confusion must stem in that a Scorpion was a name of a type of cheiroballstra. Like a Chevy impala or chevy nova....
I was understanding that the cheiroballistra demonstrated the most advanced tech. changes including the metal bundle covers that protect it from moisture. The I had thought the cheiroballistra could be made either with a narrow spacing or wide according to purpose but mainly designed to be mobile and more compact. The scorpion in some accounts were sometimes mounted on chariots or carriages, or mounted high on ballistrades. This is where I get bogged down by acadamia.
My reading or research only suggests the main tech. advancements was the positioning or spacing of the side stanchions from paralell to offset thus giving limbs more arc. There are two different terms assigned to each as the stanchion placement the main criteria for the two terms. Other major differences are the tech. advance from limb powered to torsion, the use of metal frames allowing a wider frame.
I cannot be sure, but years ago I came across a beautifully crafted machine (by aitor?) with the metal jackets holding bundles. This machine demonstrated it could be used either as an outswinger or inswinger alternately as wished. I suspect it was made according to that marden dudes specs, but my observation was that the frame was too wide or the bundles too short for max effeciency. Either way it was a beautiful machine. That marden guy sure knew history but I dont think he ever built one or designed any working machines.
Although my prototypes are small with a five inch arm, it has no prob creating significant velocities and distance with a 1 1/4 inch steel ball. The holes in my concrete basement wall suggests that yes, it IS a siege-engine but a very small one. The "scorpion" on youtube "building the impossible" was laughable in performance and broke on the second shot despite all the world class engineers and craftsman that built the thing. If it was built to Mardens specs, it proved nothing except Mardens theories/interpretations were seriously flawed.
It seems that old world engineers had it going on, and could teach modern engineers a thing or two because modern recreations rarely perform as historical accounts suggest in most re-creations I have seen on the discovery channel. They still cannot figure out how some things were accomplished thousands of years ago by so called primitive societies and tech.
Well, I have been on the internet too long.
I updated my profile to include a name so I hope all is cool now.
I was understanding that the cheiroballistra demonstrated the most advanced tech. changes including the metal bundle covers that protect it from moisture. The I had thought the cheiroballistra could be made either with a narrow spacing or wide according to purpose but mainly designed to be mobile and more compact. The scorpion in some accounts were sometimes mounted on chariots or carriages, or mounted high on ballistrades. This is where I get bogged down by acadamia.
My reading or research only suggests the main tech. advancements was the positioning or spacing of the side stanchions from paralell to offset thus giving limbs more arc. There are two different terms assigned to each as the stanchion placement the main criteria for the two terms. Other major differences are the tech. advance from limb powered to torsion, the use of metal frames allowing a wider frame.
I cannot be sure, but years ago I came across a beautifully crafted machine (by aitor?) with the metal jackets holding bundles. This machine demonstrated it could be used either as an outswinger or inswinger alternately as wished. I suspect it was made according to that marden dudes specs, but my observation was that the frame was too wide or the bundles too short for max effeciency. Either way it was a beautiful machine. That marden guy sure knew history but I dont think he ever built one or designed any working machines.
Although my prototypes are small with a five inch arm, it has no prob creating significant velocities and distance with a 1 1/4 inch steel ball. The holes in my concrete basement wall suggests that yes, it IS a siege-engine but a very small one. The "scorpion" on youtube "building the impossible" was laughable in performance and broke on the second shot despite all the world class engineers and craftsman that built the thing. If it was built to Mardens specs, it proved nothing except Mardens theories/interpretations were seriously flawed.
It seems that old world engineers had it going on, and could teach modern engineers a thing or two because modern recreations rarely perform as historical accounts suggest in most re-creations I have seen on the discovery channel. They still cannot figure out how some things were accomplished thousands of years ago by so called primitive societies and tech.
Well, I have been on the internet too long.
I updated my profile to include a name so I hope all is cool now.
Torsion rules! - Joel from Ham. Ont. Ca.
