Pompeii's battle scars linked to an ancient 'machine gun'

zeusdclxvi 8 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The polybolos was an advanced ancient Greek repeating ballista, often described as a "machine gun of antiquity," invented in the 3rd century BC by Dionysius of Alexandria. It used a unique chain-drive and gravity-fed system to fire bolts in rapid succession

▲

mkl 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polybolos

Apparently it was on MythBusters, but I don't remember that one.

▲

josefx 5 hours ago | parent [-]

Could it be this one? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IN-V3nUCvpI

	▲	Springtime 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Matches the name of episode 152[1] the Wikipedia article cites for the info. Seems the classification of seasons and even the season's episode order on Wikipedia differs from the one in the Youtube title. [1] Text-based summary: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MythBusters_(2010_season)#Epis...

▲

zadikian 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I've heard of this, but what's the advantage? They still need to recharge the torsion the same way, which must've taken longer than someone manually feeding the next bolt.

▲

bondarchuk an hour ago | parent | next [-]

From wikipedia it sounds like the advantage is not really speed of recharging but just that it will repeatedly fire for as long as the lever is turned without any other actions or pauses needed in between. Maybe not losing 10% (or whatever?) of the time on bolt feeding was sufficient advantage? Maybe the ease of operation in a hectic battle situation was advantage enough? Or maybe the continuous power requirement made it more feasible to use multiple soldiers at once working at higher speed, without them having to synchronize starting/stopping/waiting every x seconds?

▲

lelanthran 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> I've heard of this, but what's the advantage? They still need to recharge the torsion the same way, which must've taken longer than someone manually feeding the next bolt.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MythBusters_(2010_season)#Epis...

> They set up 5 targets at 90 yards (82 m) and brought in professional archer Brady Ellison to provide a benchmark for comparison. He hit the targets in 2 minutes, using 11 arrows. After further breakdowns and repair work, Adam and Jamie accomplished the feat with 15 arrows in 1 minute and 50 seconds.

Certainly sounds like a win to me, if it was faster and just as accurate as the worlds number one ranked recurve archer :-/

You can train a man to turn the windlass in about an hour. It takes years to get an archer to the same accuracy and speed.

So, a definite advantage.

▲

bfivyvysj 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You can't imagine why a quick succession of bolt fire might be more advantageous than a slow reload?

▲

zadikian 5 hours ago | parent [-]

I mean how is it actually faster if the rate limiting step is the same. People are claiming it was 2-3X as fast.

▲

Someone 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Reading https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polybolos, at least some of these used a windlass to rearm. That may explain part of the speed difference over one using a separate lever or one that’s rearmed purely by hand.

These weapons also may have given up on some firing power for firing frequency.

▲

eucyclos 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Maybe it's harder to deal with ten projectiles in a minute followed by a nine minute reload than one a minute for ten minutes?

	▲	ithkuil 4 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Even a short surprise can be crucial in an ancient battle, where breaking formation can be fatal
	▲	zadikian 4 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		I'm not even considering the magazine reload time, just the time between shots assuming a full mag. That's 10 recharges either way, as shown in the videos. It's not like a machine gun where the energy is in the powder.
	▲	goodpoint 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Very likely.

▲

normie3000 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Maybe one less operator required? Less chance of losing a hand?

	▲	zadikian 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Yeah I figured it's more convenient, but they're claiming it's also twice as fast. With the chu ko nu I get it, you only have two hands, so the auto reload was faster.

▲

adzm 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The psychological advantage can't be discounted either

▲

metalman an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

likely would have had tactical utility to take out one select high value target especialy against an oponent who had not encountered it. so more of a battlefield assination weapon. it also decouples the need to have great physical strength ,and visual acuity