Plumbata

[Robert Vermaat]

You are missing the point.  

Oh I hope not – every plumbata has one.

Whether thrown UH or OH the plumbata will have fletching impacting its flight.  So, what makes a dart with fletching fly further when thrown UH than a dart with fletching when thrown OH as you claim?  They both, when properly thrown will have identical launch attitudes, i.e,  point forward, tilted upwards.  

The certainly start point forward, but then the tail starts to overtake them until the flights correct that – the ‘righting itself’ – happens both with UH as well as OH throws. Of course you can judge that ‘poorly executed throws’ but I’ve seen that happen also in the videos of people who reach up to 80 meters. That may be due to how hard they can throw – I never claimed I was Olympic quality, quite the opposite – or how their plumbatae were constructed. There is not ONE plumbata type, weights differ wildly. Of my own versions I throw very light ones and commercial ones with a totally different weight distribution – and it shows.

So I claim directly comparable real world experience.  In fact, I may have more experience throwing plumbata-like objects than anyone on this thread.  

LOL. I know (of) lawn darts, but I’ve never seen them around here. That website denies me access btw.
I don’t know how lawn darts differ from plumbata reproductions, but I’m not optimistic about straight comparisons. Once a guy told me about modern darts being ‘the same as plumbatae’, so UH throws were silly according to him, ‘because everyone knows that darts are thrown OH’.

Btw, how did you throw the lawn dart? How did you hold it?

I’m not going deeper into our ballistics discussion because either I do not understand enough about the physics behind it, or I don’t seem to be able to explain why I have a different view on that particular subject. To me you can’t discuss the behavior of a plumbata comparing it to a ball, whereas you seem to hold the view that you can. Let’s agree to disagree here and focus on other details.

I'll attempt to clarify my thinking, (not always a successful venture): A dart thrown overhand or underhand, with equal amounts of energy (forward, angular, lateral momentum), with equal environmental factors, and launched with the same trajectory will land in the same place. Basic physics supports my claim, I believe.

I think the detail in that statement is ‘with the same trajectory’. This is where, in my humble experience, the differences between OH and UH occur? An OH throw has the hand deliver a different force than it does with an UH throw. I should use a high-speed camera (if I had one) to look at the difference, but I would suggest (hope it’s correct) that the UH throw naturally takes the plumbata more upwards, and the OH throw takes it more forward? This is were the energy is delivered right? That final flick of the wrist?

I also maintain that dart could be thrown en masse, overhand, from formation to a distance farther than that attainable by spear/javelin.

There we agree fully.

That's why I reduced the speed by 20%.   /quote]

Alright, you did not mention that, only ‘modern horse’. I would say a reduction of 30-50% would be more accurate, given that the horse was not fresh out of the stables either.

Are you maintaining that enemy cavalry forces didn't attempt to break up formations?  Roman squares, Wellington's squares, the enemy charged them both.  If the Roman's formation cracks then the, say, Gothic cavalry wouldn't be in among them?  

No, I did not say that – they charged them when weakened. Plenty of examples exist indeed of enemy cavalry charging Roman infantry, but when not weakened these always held out. Horses are not easy to train and although you can train a horse to charge straight into a group of armed men (I’ve been part of such training) it would cost you the horse (and the rider) without guarantee of success. It’s a myth that cavalry is there to ‘charge the enemy line’. I know of a 6th-c. battle of 100 Roman infantry against Persian cavalry more than 6 times their number. They held out for hours and only succumbed when the Persians dismounted.

Cavalry keeps up the pressure with higher tactical speed, suppressing enemy light troops from coming forward – and of course countering enemy cavalry. Only armoured cavaly (with armoured horses) are meant to harass the infantry up close and personal, with their long lances (7 foot) keeping out of range if possible. Only when the line greaks is cavalry sent in to break ranks, but that’s a gamble. After the enemy breaks the cavalry really comes into play by attacking the fleeing troops – and that is the moment where the casualties fall, not before.
This is standard Roman tactics btw, and it goes for a lot of their enemies as well.

What are ‘Roman squares’ btw? You mean the manipular organization or the later Roman organization? They are not comparable to Napoleonic squared or the pike infantry that went before it.

OK, now I am confused, did the enemy charge or not charge?  

There are a number of phases in a battle, requiring different counter-measures. I’m talking Late Roman army here - simplified of course (I know this will draw criticim from people who know more about the subject):
1 – after the march to the battlefield, the army is drawn up into the respective battle positions. No enemy contact.
2 – the first contact, usually by arrows, is met by archers. If you have no achers, reaction requires the first shield-wall formation (static) with the first four ranks holding their shields in front and above (a fulcum). Usually cavalry is deployed now to force archers/slingers back behind their own infantry.
3 – First use of plumbatae – if the cavalry comes to close or attempts a charge while the infantry is still deploying). This would be an OH throw straight into the attackers.
4 – closing with the enemy. Romans would await an enemy coming to them, again by an OH plumbata throw from at least the front ranks. I don’t believe in any ‘rotation schemes’ of people throwing and running back while their comrades throw the next ones. Either the darts are passed forward for a next throw, or they throw their 5 darts and that’s it.
5 – closing with an enemy that will not come forward required the mobile shield wall (confusingly also named fulcum), that resembled the old testudo. Suppressing fire (UH plumbatae and archers/slingers would fire over their heads.
6 – infantry main battle. Suppressing fire (UH plumbatae and archers/slingers would fire over their heads.
Some phases could be repeated, or interspaced with cavalry attacks – see above. Mostly one army pulled back or broke, after which the cavalry was the main actor.

I bet he still went home and continued to spout his unfounded opinion anyway, knowing him.

Two things abou that. By PM, as it’s unrelated to this discussion.

Soccer comes from the term 'association football'

I know. It just comes across as odd to hear a sport that’s being played worldwide under the name ‘football’ being referred to as something else in one single country, who adopted the name for a different game. Why did they not name it ‘American rugby’ or something like that? Crickets in cricket? Yikes!

I sometimes use this example when discussions are getting off the tracks due to misunderstandings about terminology.

you reported a following wind (I didn't see wind speed in your report, I'll look again later).  A following wind will carry a higher shot farther than a lower shot.  

It does. Despite not having a wind meter I know the wind was not significant enough to influence the test results.

You also state that the UH method obtained marginally more distance that the OH...yet the farthest throw of DK1 was overhanded.  I know...outlier. /quote]

Actually I blame the lower distance achieved on me getting tired. After a certain amount of throws you see the distances dropping, which is when I stop. Repeating the test with UH throws first may show a difference, I must try that.

It was great that you included your poor throwing technique as one potential influencing factor on your results.

But of course. I’m no athlete and not having other people taking part in these tests can really make a difference where conclusions come into play.
I’m planning to do a test with 15 plumbata types and at least 5 people, each test throwing one type at least 5 times. Testing is actually quite dull, and one walks up and down a lot retrieving the darts.

In your report you stated that: 'No wobbling, turning over in flight or similarly unstable behaviour could be observed.'  I must be mis-reading something because it seems that you maintained the opposite in your past couple of responses to me.  Something about the fletching 'righting' the plumbatae.  

See? terminology confusion. My English is not perfect.
By 'wobbling' I mean wildly erratic behaviour throughout the flight.
By 'turning over in flight' I mean the dart making a complete 360 in the air. Some darts do this, especially the old Indian reproductions who seem to have an iron rod in the wooden shaft. It prevents breaking but messes up flights.
By 'righting itself' I mean the characteristic behaviour described above, where the dart, after the launch, has the tail attempting to overtake the head.

Say hello to Sinter Klaas for me.

Nicolaas has already left the country on December 6th, so that’ll have to wait until next year

Added later: some of my plumbatae