zompist bboard

Mark, on the 'The descent of les?asi' page, regarding the Ktuvoki, wrote: The skin of their chest and back is thick and heavy enough to resist a knife or arrow (though not a spear or sword).

This struck me as being kind of odd, because of the mechanics involved.

A stab from a knife tends to have more penetrating power than even a bullet (they can tear through many kevlar vests easily), mostly of course because of pressure and follow-through.

Depending on what kind of sword attack is being talked about, swords seem to deliver less force yet. A stab from a sword could theoretically do the same sort of thing, only a sword is more awkward to handle for stabbing purposes and the point tends to have more surface area.

Daggers used in association with cloaks tended to be essentially a long, finely-pointed cylinder with a hilt, to minimize the surface area the force is distibuted across.

A slashing or hacking attack doesn't deliver that much force, either. One is certainly capable of hacking off limbs, etc., but the aforementioned kevlar vest would normally have no trouble catching the blade.

As far as burying blades into things, axes are really nice there: the same kind of arc and velocity as you get with a sword, but with less awkwardness and less surface area.

Of course a thrown spear won't have nearly the kind of power to penetrate as an arrow will. One thrown with an atlatl could certainly compete, but an arrow fired from an English longbow with a long, fine point can go through plate armor very easily.

Unless there's something I'm overlooking, or if my reasoning or knowledge is flawed (it's getting late anyway), then shouldn't that sentence in the quote be reversed somewhat?

Well, assuming Ktuvok skin is in any way like plate armor or kevlar.

Interesting reflections... we really need some access to ktuvok skins to experiment on.

Some fishes (I think I'm recalling this correctly) have skins so tough that a surprising amount of force is needed to puncture them-- they resist even a sharp scalpel. That's partly what I had in mind, I think.

Biologically, it makes the most sense for ktuvok skin to resist the weapons most likely to be used against it: ktuvok claws and teeth. I think these would be more like knives than like swords-- that is, a ktuvok can't slash another's arm off with his claws, but he could try a knifelike slashing attack.

I'm confused. Are you agreeing with Spacey or not?

Ghost

Interesting question. But I must agree (as much as possible) with tha Zomp. They would be smart to have a skin tough enough to resist the most frequently used weapons. But then again, what is more penetrating (searching for an answer on the real question)?

Rob wrote:Interesting question. But I must agree (as much as possible) with tha Zomp. They would be smart to have a skin tough enough to resist the most frequently used weapons. But then again, what is more penetrating (searching for an answer on the real question)?

I'm pretty sure a knife is much more penetrating than a sword, for the reasons I discussed. I have and have used both, and that's what I've noticed.

But anything that puts the force behind it over a smaller surface area will be more penetrating. That's how a bed of nails works--it distributes your weight across a much larger surface area with hundreds of nails than it would on just one.

zompist wrote:Interesting reflections... we really need some access to ktuvok skins to experiment on.

Some fishes (I think I'm recalling this correctly) have skins so tough that a surprising amount of force is needed to puncture them-- they resist even a sharp scalpel. That's partly what I had in mind, I think.

Biologically, it makes the most sense for ktuvok skin to resist the weapons most likely to be used against it: ktuvok claws and teeth. I think these would be more like knives than like swords-- that is, a ktuvok can't slash another's arm off with his claws, but he could try a knifelike slashing attack.

Chain mail is sort of like that. It can catch a point relatively well, so it resists stabs pretty effectively, but a hard blow from an axe will tear right through it.

I found the passage I was thinking of; it's from King Solomon's Ring:

Konrad Lorenz wrote:In older aquarium literature, it is often stated that these [ventral] spines are used so effectively that one of the fighters may sink down dead, perforated by the spine of his opponent. Apparently the writers of these works have never tried to "perforate" a stickleback; for even a dead stickleback will slip from under the sharpest scalpel before one is able to penetrate its tough skin, even in places where it is not reinforced by bony armor. Place a dead stickleback on a soft surface-- which certainly offers a much better resistance than water-- and try to run it through with a sharp needle. You will be surprised at the force required to do so.

Space Dracula wrote:

Mark, on the 'The descent of les?asi' page, regarding the Ktuvoki, wrote: The skin of their chest and back is thick and heavy enough to resist a knife or arrow (though not a spear or sword).

This struck me as being kind of odd, because of the mechanics involved.

A stab from a knife tends to have more penetrating power than even a bullet (they can tear through many kevlar vests easily), mostly of course because of pressure and follow-through.

As long as you're talking about pistol bullets, yes. A combat rifle OTOH can shoot through metal plates that'd stop a knife-stab cold.

Depending on what kind of sword attack is being talked about, swords seem to deliver less force yet. A stab from a sword could theoretically do the same sort of thing, only a sword is more awkward to handle for stabbing purposes and the point tends to have more surface area.

Depends on what sword you're talking about, too. I've handled a gladius (high-quality replica only, though) and didn't find it any more awkward to stab with than a knife; and its point is just as acute as that of many knifes. (Penetration-wise an acute point is important for opening the first hole; once that is done it is much easier for the blade's edges to widen the hole "sideways" than it would be for them to cut through the intact armour.) Of course the gladius is specifically designed for stabbing; sword types with rounded or cut-off points are far less useful for this type of attack.

A slashing or hacking attack doesn't deliver that much force, either.

Slashing attacks don't (most of the force is projected along the target rather than through it); hacking/chopping attacks do. (Axes are "hacking" weapons, for example.)

One is certainly capable of hacking off limbs, etc., but the aforementioned kevlar vest would normally have no trouble catching the blade.

Don't bet too much on it... kevlar fibres don't like sharp edges at all.

As far as burying blades into things, axes are really nice there: the same kind of arc and velocity as you get with a sword, but with less awkwardness and less surface area.

Less surface area, but more awkwardness due to the axe's inherently poor balance. (Indeed, the poor balance is part of the reason for the axe's good penetration.)

Of course a thrown spear won't have nearly the kind of power to penetrate as an arrow will.

Depends entirely on what type of thrown spear you're comparing to which type of bow firing what type of arrow. Heavy long-bow arrows pack a lot of punch, but they're playing in a different league than eg. the reed arrows fired by ancient Egyptian archers or the arrows used by Crusade-era Moslem horse archers... and a light javelin quite different from eg. a heavy roman pilum.

'Course, you're the one talking about thrown spears. The original text only says "a spear", which to me implies a thrusting spear (in English I'd use "javelin" as a generic term for throwing spears)... and a spear thrust can be a lot more powerful than a knife stab.

Well, assuming Ktuvok skin is in any way like plate armor or kevlar.

Plate and kevlar have quite different armour characteristics, and neither of them is exactly equivalent to thick leather - which is the armour material I'd expect to be the most similar to ktuvok skin.

Regards,

Oerjan

Space Dracula wrote: Chain mail is sort of like that. It can catch a point relatively well, so it resists stabs pretty effectively, but a hard blow from an axe will tear right through it.

You have that exactly backwards. :) One of the reasons chain went out of style was because longbows and crossbows got popular. Chain sucks against stabbing attacks like arrowpoints and stiletto blades; it is most effective against slashing attacks--a katana, for instance, is nigh hopeless against chainmail, as it's meant to do slashing 'draw' cuts. An axe does not count as slashing, BTW, as it ideally delivers all its force in the direction of the swing. Axes are also nice against chainmail because, even if the blow fails to destroy the links, it can drive them into the skin and do almost as much damage.

There are people in the SCA who make their chain out of aluminum, to save on weight. What they're missing is that it's partly the mass of the armor that makes it effective--it's heavy, so it's hard to move.

--Neon Fox

Neon Fox wrote:a katana, for instance, is nigh hopeless against chainmail

Katanas are nigh hopeless against pretty much any armour.

Rory wrote:

Neon Fox wrote:a katana, for instance, is nigh hopeless against chainmail

Katanas are nigh hopeless against pretty much any armour.

As I understand it, there are different styles of Japanese swordplay that date from different prevalent uses of the sword, e.g. there were battlefield techniques that dealt almost exclusively with finding chinks in an opponent's armour (or fighting lightly-armoured infantry from horseback), and other techniques that concentrated on fighting for personal duels, bodyguarding and assassination purposes. Of course you wouldn't expect to hack through armour with a katana.

In general, I'd expect that the katana was a weapon of last resort for samurai -- who also fought with bows and polearms like the yari -- or a personal duelling weapon. I have the impression that this latter function was considerably refined under the Tokugawa shogunate, but maybe that's just from watching too many Toshiro Mifune films.

Also because their armour wasn't very good.

ils wrote:I have the impression that this latter function was considerably refined under the Tokugawa shogunate, but maybe that's just from watching too many Toshiro Mifune films.

Presumably because large-scale warfare was pretty much over by then?

zompist wrote:

ils wrote:I have the impression that this latter function was considerably refined under the Tokugawa shogunate, but maybe that's just from watching too many Toshiro Mifune films.

Presumably because large-scale warfare was pretty much over by then?

I should think. Wasn't much else to do for a Tokugawa-era samurai, as I understand it... except bureaucratic work.