New trebuchet rolls out of the workshop.

Literally.

“Sir Rodney” is a wheeled trebuchet with a fixed counterweight. He has been built to the same specs as Tiny – my swinging counterweight trebuchet – so that we can do some practical field testing. Sir Rodney has 26kgs of lead bolted to his throwing arm and seems very enthusiastic about this whole “throwing stuff” concept based on dry firing tests.

My co-defendants and I will be taking Tiny and Sir Rodney out for a full field test this evening when it cools off. There may be pictures… they may be on the news or in the papers, who can say. 

Sir Rodney was designed the week that Jonny Hart died and is named after the goofy looking knight in  Jonny’s Wizard of Id cartoons. I’ve always found wheeled trebuchets to look pretty goofy so hes stuck with it. No plan for a Gwendolen yet although there may be a Bride of Chucky in the new year.

UPDATE: Heres a couple of pictures I grabbed last night after we finished getting ready for todays school visit… the one I left the camera at home for.

sir-rodney-end-on.jpg sir-rodney.jpg

But for those of you playing at home with a ballistic inclination here are some numbers for you to plot.

Counterweight  Distance

    14.0kg             19.0M
    15.5kg             23.5M
    17.0kg             27.5M
    18.5kg             30.5M
     20.0kg            32.6M  

I’m not sure why a wheeled trebuchet would “more accurate” given that it has more movement for a start, but what it does have is more range due to a more efficient action with the counterweight falling as near as straight down as possible without wasting energy swinging around the axle. I haven’t plotted exactely how much more range yet but after one of our friends “fixed” him the day before I’ve had to do some retrograde work to get him back to what I like to call “functional”. 

Advertisements

13 Responses to New trebuchet rolls out of the workshop.

  1. Veeshir says:

    I had seen some show that claimed that wheeled trebuchets were more accurate.
    I’m interested in finding out if that’s so.

    • devan says:

      Indeed it is very true. The trebuchets that are nailed to the ground rock hard and stuff. Rather than the wheeled ones; they’ll roll and therefore will throw further.

  2. J.M. Heinrichs says:

    Are you making the Armourer sweat for the pictures?

    Cheers

  3. Veeshir says:

    Well? Is the wheeled one more accurate? I was hoping for a report.

    I got these free plans for a trebuchet from the Internet and I wanted to know which one to build.

    Just kidding, but I do want to know if the wheeled one was more accurate.

  4. Murray says:

    The Armourer could use some sweating. 🙂

  5. Murray says:

    Veershir I’ll see you in my office.

  6. Veeshir says:

    I was watching a show on the History Channel where they were doing midieval weapons and one was the trebuchet. They said the one with wheels was more accurate, they could predict where it would hit more accurately while the non-wheeled one would fly more unpredictably. That didn’t make sense to me and I have a natural skepticism of the History Channel.
    I guess I’ll have to make my own.

    In case I ever end up in midieval England, I’ll need to know things.

    Veeshir I’ll see you in my office

    If I had a dollar for everytime I’ve heard that, I’d have a lot of dollars.

  7. Murray says:

    Based on my practical experience: Load.of.bollocks.

    Less movement on launch platform = smaller impact zone.

    Also based on my experience once you have gathered the data – see above – you can hit anything in range with the first shot with a pencil and a protractor. I had school kids doing it yesterday.

  8. krm says:

    neat article on the school kids doing it (no, not that “it”, the weaponry thing, you pervs).

    You should update to lnk to it.

  9. Veeshir says:

    Thanks for the answer.
    I mistrust the History Channel quite a bit, this just adds to it.

    I still remember when I realized they weren’t as accurate as they could be, they were talking about “Aztecs” and they never mentioned “Mexica” and called him ‘Montezuma” instead of “Motecuzoma”.

    And just to cement my “See me in my office” rep, in the article about you corrupting young minds with offensive weapons, they keep talking about “maths”.

    Is that they way you talk over there or is that just some nitwit “journalist” adding an unnecessary “s” at the end?

  10. Murray says:

    “Maths” is our cover story. Shhh.

    You can’t turn up to schools and say we’re here to teach kids to destroy things at long range.

  11. Pat Patterson says:

    Doggone right, that’s Planned Parenthood’s job description!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: