i found this but i don't know what that means? Do you know?---;Gemini ring (Roman) longbow shooting is an ancient Roman technique for shooting with a longbow. The bow is equipped with two rings, which are located at some distance from each other. When firing, the arrow is guided between these two rings to increase the accuracy and power of the shot.
it was simple weapon that most could use plus their spears were meant to disable shields because of the barbed point on the back of the tip which would make it very difficult to pull out once it was in a shield during battle.
2:14 So are the composite bows really all that much better than the self bows, besides their weakness of being more sensitive to weather? Is range and penetration all that better?
It depends, hornbows tend to be more efficient at higher draw weights. Look at Manchu bows, at 80lbs of draw, they launch a heavier arrow at faster speeds than a 120lb English longbow. I believe that the 80lb Manchu threw a 1230 gran arrow at 190fps whereas the English longbow launched it around 160-170fps. Turkish hornbows are by far the most efficient bows for distance shooting and speed shooting as well, hornbows are much more efficient at higher draw weights, but they are very comparable with self bows at draw weights under 80lbs
@t123Come to think of it, almost a year later, lol, is the longbow shot at 28 or 30" while the Manchu bow is shot at 35"? Maybe that had a lot to do with why the Manchu bow performed better, yet i wonder how the heavier siyahs affected it as well, regardless, quite impressive considering the GPP difference, definitely something to it.
@@MarcassCarcass I know what measurement Momo was talking about. It's Peter Dekker's bow. It was drawn to 32" in the test using a 3 finger draw. The sheer magnitude in power is more apparent when you look at the kinetic energy of the 2 bows instead of the speed. Peter's 82lbs Manchu got 135 joules whereas the 128lbs longbow got 107 joules. You would need a 150-160# longbow to match the kinetic energy of Peter's 82lbs. Joe Gibb's measurements confirm this. That being said the cast efficiency in Peter's test was 94% which is so insanely high that many of us think there was an error in either measuring the DFC or the speed of the arrow. But regardless of if that specific data was right or wrong, horn bows are still undoubtedly considerably more efficient. The Manchu is the most powerful out of them but not all were built for raw penetration, many were built for speed. The bows on the small & speedy side tend to be similar to self bows in terms of kinetic energy, but they are obviously also way faster than self bows and thus have a longer effective range and are easier to aim. Most common historical bow shapes land somewhere in the middle of this gradient, having both a little bit more speed and penetration than self bows but not going extreme on either one.
