7.5" unpadded glaives at Kingdom Crusades

[Mord]

Having briefly read this thread, there seems to be some sort of arguement as to the effectiveness of poles (7.5 or 6 feet, or whatever) and great swords (at whatever length and weight). This, in my opinion, is all nonsense.

The most effective weapon is the warrior who knows how to use the pole ax, great sword, spear, or broad sword. Skill always beats technology.

Mord.

[Jean Paul de Sens]

*Shrugs*

Some of it is cultural Animal.

I personally don't like them for a couple of reasons.

I don't know what real bladed weapon they are supposed to represent for one.

This. [img]http://members.aol.com/dargolyt/TheForge/GLAIVE.GIF[/img]

Basically a sword on a stick. I've never figured that out why some people have no problem with a sword=stick, but a round stick on top of a shaved handle does NOT equal a sword on a stick?

Also, I don't like some of the things that glaves men can do with them as it related to game play.

If it is supposed to be a hafted, metal bladed weapon, then how can you slap the ground with it and use the recoil to bounce up into my leg. They are whippy....i don't know.

I realize that it's pretty easy to shoot holes into these arguements...but none the less that's how I, for one, feel.


I was arguing the point of safety versus a padded polearm with some of our brothers in the east during the wait to get into the castle this year and they say that thier injury rate has dropped since using them instead of padded ones.

Thier claim was that the smaller mass made them safer, where to me, it seemed like the greater speed more than made up for it....

I think both weapons can be extremely dangerous, especially if swung out of control. I suspect the "increased safety" of the unpadded stems from everyone running around saying "THESE THINGS ARE VERY DANGEROUS SO YOU MUST BE CAREFUL WITH THEM OR WE'LL MAUL YOU"... I've received more slobberknockers (shots to the head that make you go "where am I"?) from paddeds, and more leg and shoulder crushers from the unpadded... just depends on how you want your pain.

Jean Paul[/img]

[Jonny Deuteronomy]

Animal: Howdy! Izzall good, Dog.

Trystan wrote "The 7.5' unpadded glaive is the hardest hitting weapon in the SCA"

I feel that I must disagree. While a glaive may impart more force during a strike, due largely to its mass, it is moving relatively slowly, when compared to a greatsword. The strike of a glaive will, essentially, give a very hard push, while the greatsword puts similar (but somewhat less) force into a very short moment in time. You may get knocked around more, with a glaive, but you'll get damaged more with the greatsword - at least, in our game.

That's fine, except I said hardest hitting not most damaging. You actually help make my point a coupla times here. For this model, assume that (force=mass * acceleration).

I also must disagree, using a similar argument, that the spread position of the hands contributes to the greater force. The spread position of the hands makes it easier to maneuver the glaive, and to start it moving, but it will not be moving as fast when it hits. The radius of rotation will be too short much shorter than that employed by a greatsword.

In my model, the radius of the swing is the length of the weapon from the tip to the rear-most hand. I think you mean the arc of the swing, which is a variable depending on how far back behind his back the user starts thier swing, and whether the forward hand or their body is the fulcrum, its relative position on the weapon and distance to target. I had initially valued this as 0 because similar arcs can be achieved with either weapon, but may re-think this some more.

I was a strong proponent of unpadded polearms, but what I used, when I played with my naginata (essentially, a glaive), was two pieces of rattan that overlapped about 14 inches. I also used big, heavy pieces of rattan. There wasn't a lot of whip (there was some, but only not really noticeable). It was tip-heavy, and had to be used as I would think a steel and hardwood weapon would have.

Now here I must confess that I didn't take the flex factor into the equation, which would increase with weapon length and decrease with a greater diameter of rattan. Unless one's technique includes using that whip effect to increase the angular momentum of the weapon at impact. Styles of swing introduce a lot of variables here, which I suspect accounts for Animal's positive results. I guess that's why they call it Martial Arts and not Martial Sciences. That means I emphaticaly agree with Mord and also most of JPdeS statements.

I don't have anything good to say about unpadded polearms that consist of a pole of rattan with different colored tape on one end, weighing not much more than my broadsword. That is taking advantage of the rules of the game, and is, to my mind, completely unrealistic. To my mind, it is even worse the the so-called "madu's". Take a hardwood shaft, tip it with steel, and run the steel down the shaft somewhat to protect the wood, then show me how fast and how accurately you can thrust, one handed, starting with a tip-down position.

Note that I am making an appeal to realism, not authenticity.

Suffice to say that I use it as a 7.5' spear that I can also whack the shite out of someone with. I think of it as a long broad spear blade that I can cut or slash with. Think sword blade on the end of a stick, not poleaxe. The only times I normally start with the tip down is with the tip on the ground for 'sweeps', or with both arms over my head for high 'spoons' and downward strikes or thrusts, all of which would work just dandy with the weapon you describe, using two hands. No one considers the 7.5'UPG a one-handed weapon so I cannot address that...??? I don't really think about authenticity or realism while I am using it, I mainly think about just using it.

[Greylond]

No one considers the 7.5'UPG a one-handed weapon so I cannot address that...???

I believe Duke Paul was referring to Madus at that point. Not the UPGs.

To my mind, it is even worse the the so-called "madu's". Take a hardwood shaft, tip it with steel, and run the steel down the shaft somewhat to protect the wood, then show me how fast and how accurately you can thrust, one handed, starting with a tip-down position.

[Corwin of ArgentLupe]

With more distance between your hands than the GS allows, the fulcrum of the glaive moves forward on your hip or torso, you get more leverage, and therefore, more power

Wouldn't that mean that baseball players should swing with their hands apart and not together?

[Animal]

Leverage is different than impact. Hands apart give you leverage but hands together give you impact. It's like when you shop wood. You start with your hands apart but when you connect you slide your hands together for maximum force. Simple

[Sir Daniel]

For this model, assume that (force=mass * acceleration).

Sorry to interupt here, but we've touched on a bugaboo of mine.

Force is not what is important here. Force is a measurment that takes place over time. What we want is Kinetic Energy. That is a measurment of force of impact at the exact point in time.

The proper equation is therefore

KE=1/2*Mass*velocity^2

Velocity at the point of impact is relevant, not the acceleration that brought you to that point. BTW this means that an increase of velocity at the expense of a bit of mass yealds much more kinetic energy. There is a minimum of mass though with sca weapons since at a certain point you don't gain much speed when a weapon get really light.

Aside from that I agree with Duke Paul, when I want to hit someone quick, I poke them with a glaive. When I want to hit them hard, I use a greatsword

[Jean Paul de Sens]

For this model, assume that (force=mass * acceleration).

Sorry to interupt here, but we've touched on a bugaboo of mine.

Force is not what is important here. Force is a measurment that takes place over time. What we want is Kinetic Energy. That is a measurment of force of impact at the exact point in time.

The proper equation is therefore

KE=1/2*Mass*velocity^2

Velocity at the point of impact is relevant, not the acceleration that brought you to that point. BTW this means that an increase of velocity at the expense of a bit of mass yealds much more kinetic energy. There is a minimum of mass though with sca weapons since at a certain point you don't gain much speed when a weapon get really light.

Aside from that I agree with Duke Paul, when I want to hit someone quick, I poke them with a glaive. When I want to hit them hard, I use a greatsword

Actually Daniel, you're simplifying the issue too. There are multiple physics going on here that bear consideration when talking about impact. There's the energy put into rebound, there's the momentum imparted to the target, and there's jerk (i.e), how fast the object (usually thinking "head" here) was accelerated, which gives your probably of concussions and broken bones.

Weapon's physics are complex stuff, and that's why these are so highly debated.