Harder to train and you can't even shoot in difficult position, and also if you load a crossbow you can shot it every time as long it's loaded no need to take arrows from your quiver, if people back then develops crossbows early and understand how advantageous crossbows can they might be warped the entire history easily.
I agree with all your points, but you forgot one thing The instant Legolas can shoot shorter arrows. They're easier to make, and your enemies can't take them and shoot them back. Great vid!
@@gizmonomono shorter bolts are easier to make too, but then we get into theoreticals (the Mongolia used all their industrial might to producing short bolts, they would easily outlast in a long battle)
@@gizmonomono i guess you can use any arrow smaller than the device.Use the same bow as your enemy,but carry small arrows:he can't use yours,but you can use theirs because they fit in the device
The focus of this video is on arrow repeaters that did exist in history...why were they not widely adopted? When the mongols conquered china, why didn't they use their repeating crossbows and spread them to europe?? The quick answer is their archers shot just as fast, since when the repeater's magazine is empty it takes long time to reload.
Maybe can built a power assist version of the IL. You already have a 240lbs bow, so maybe use a 100lbs bow to reduce the stress and make it to more human usable levels. It will be not easy to carry, but maybe as a siege defense weapon?
Interesting, Joerg's reply mentions how after he made the first version after 2017, now there is more people out there interested and willing to test out and mod the design to different types. If you can get the 240lbs bow to single person operate levels without needing superhuman strength. Then the heavy bolts fired would be an interesting case study
I mean longbows are known to reduce in efficiency after a certain poundage but what about bolts shot using an IL? Would a heavy bolt shot using a 240lbs bow be better or worst than an arrow?
the Chinese repeater has one important advantage compared to the instant Legolas, it's magazine is gravity fed so you don't need a spring on top blocking you when you reload, hence faster reload speed. Unfortunately for the IL, it is the slowest to reload compared to other devices. 5 arrows inside is negliable as a practical battlefield weapon
Repeating crossbows were very cool, but we’re generally not used as the faster something fires generally the less penetrative power you have. And for much of history armor was the big Trump card that armies used. As for cost, Chinese repeating crossbows were actually very cheap and given the lever you used far less strength to use. But weren’t common for the reasons mentioned. Good against Calvary and in sieges or boarding actions, but generally a niche weapon.
Here are features of instant legolas that differentiate them from old repeating devices: -detachable from bow (can use it to fire enemy arrows back when enemy can't. -has sights, great repeating accuracy with minimal training. -design is actually simple and can be made from wood only. -you can have poundage of a longbow with draw assist without sacrificing rate of power (no need to spend years of training to operate). If you armed armed a militia with this and fire in ranks you can make it rain with arrows on enemy formation. while they have to be covered with shields, your cav can run them over. Archery techniques to reach that rate of fire require lot of training and weaker bows. IF you can replace years of training with relatively cheap wood device and turn your disposable peasant into soldier on par with trained archers why wouldn't you? Also peasant is less likely to turn and run when they are just shooting enemy from a safe distance making them cheap and effective force. With assist It also draws much faster with then any heavy crossbow. I think old repeater crossbows didn't had that kind of power.
With a reload time of 5 to 10 seconds - I don't think you would even have to fire in ranks. By the time you are in your 2nd or third reload the entire force would be putting downrange constant non-stop fire.
I think you made Points. But as Roman Legionary/ Roman Officer. Naw. Just raise shields. Keep moving. Cavalry under friendly fire attacking a blocky formation? Sure. But no. Friendly fire isn’t worth the chance. When you stop loosing arrows. Is when the formation breaks open in seconds. Throwing Pilum at incoming cavalry or prepare to watch a Blood Bath as Armoured Man and Horse fight to the death. Literally. Bloody battle. Sure their has been cases of Cavalry utterly annihilating cohorts and even a legion or two. But I’d argue cavalry does less damage to well equipped armies then Cavalry themselves. Which Cav to Cav warfare is said to be So Horrifying that many countries would simply not do it. It wasn’t even an agreement. It was just known. Of course…. Cav still fights cav
"man, Joergs instant Legolas sure got people talking about archery. Nobody would mind if I use the popularity to talk about historical ingenuity, right" Bet ya didn't expect this many people to react passionately hehe Guys, be respectful in the chat. It's not like he is talking smack about the invention.
I think the real reason the repeating weapons didn't take off is, is that to get a repeating weapon with out various drawbacks requires not just one or two innovations, but an entire series of them. We can see this with gunpowder weapons, that had to go through many steps to get to where they are now. For instance even though repeater weapons existed in WW1 a full transition couldn't occur until after that because sufficiently reliable designs for rifle powered variants mostly didn't happen until after the war, this despite having worked on the problem for decades already. Thus one only saw the deployment occur after the war instead, though even in WW2 substantially amounts of bolt actions remained. Basically conceiving of all the concepts needed for a good repeating bow, while also having the time, or tools to keep iterating till you get a viable design would probably have been quite time consuming and with no clear view on how to get to a good enough result unless you could conceive of all the things that would be possible as we can now with our completed transition in guns. This is especially relevant as once you did manage to complete a reliable repeating bow setup, it would actually be possible to give it a power assist system as well, as was demonstrated. This would have helped fire higher draw weights then at high speed. Which would have let one finally eliminate all drawbacks aside of the higher weight and maintenance/construction issues, but those would finally be offset by superior performance and easier training regimes allowing for quicker deployment of new troops. But it's a quite a set of ideas to get from start to finish as one can see, so I think it might as such never have happened as no one could conceive of the end goal being realistic. Arguably one could even point out that in modern times with repeating guns everywhere it still took quite awhile for some one to conceive of this.
yes I agree with you and the mongols did not spread these repeaters to the rest of the world because they valued their horse archers and the chukunu is useless for their military doctrine. as to the ancient greek polybolos, its a forgotten weapon so never got spread
explained very well. Keep in mind, an army that travels in all weather does not want to take along complicated equipment that can be damaged on the way. Early Horn crossbows for example had the problem that the glue used on the prod would delaminate in wet conditions. Repeating crossbows had many parts that fail, comparied to a stick and a string.
Good explanations for why they weren't used historically, but Jorge's Instant Legolas eliminates some of the drawbacks. With the draw assist, the IL could allow an archer to use a 20-30% more powerful bow. It is apparently more accurate than historical repeaters as well, as someone new to the device got a shot grouping that could be covered with one hand at 10 meter range. And it is very easy to learn how to use.
Nothing of this takes merit away from the instant legolas, it's much easier, cheaper and simpler to make than a crossbow, and crossbows were used a lot in medieval ages, yet the instant legolas shoots much faster than a crossbow or any bow regardless of the archer's training. As for reloading joerg already made a simple stripper clip with bolts. It takes you five seconds at most to reload if you are just decent at it. Composite bows with the stuff joerg has come up with would have been an absolute nightmare for any opponent. It would have rendered simple bows obsolete except on special circumstances where your line of fire needs close parabolic shots. Firearms would have been used much less too and would have developed much slower since they would only be useful to penetrate armor, something not so relevant in battle when a line of peasants can rain the sky with arrows, that's not pleasant whether you are armored or not. Nations would have quickly implented the production of these things, they are cheaper and simpler to make than any firearm or crossbow of the time and their rate of fire is ridiculous, add a counterbow with less draw weight to help you increase the draw weight if you want to get fancy. This invention would have totally changed history and delay extensively Gunpowder development on firearms (but not cannons).
right. Even if the ancient greeks figured out a repeating bow, that doesn't mean that during the medieval period people knew about it. some advance made the repeating bows that the greeks had figured out obsolete, so they were lost from technology. Then, there was a thousand years of people not properly sharing information. Just because the machine is possible with medieval technology, and just because someone had figured out something similar a thousand years before then, doesn't mean that the right people had the knowledge at the right time for it to matter. It is still arguable that it would have been used and made significant impact in strategy and outcome.
Hi this video is not about alternative history. This video is focusing on the repeating bows that did exist in history. Which is only in China/Korea and Greece. The legolas bow was just an intro. Keep in mind during the medieval period the Mongols did see Chinese using Repeating crossbows and gunpowder, so why was only gunpowder spread to Europe? BTW, all repeating bows have to be reloaded after and look at the magazine chamber, it is blocked by a spring. It is slow to reload
the uploader is not talking about the instant Legolas, he is talking about the Chinese repeater and the greek polybolos. the instant Legolas was just an intro to spark intrest
Instant legolas is way more complicated than a crossbow, and way less effective. In horseback It would be so fragile or so heavy that it wouldn't be useful, and with heavy bows... well you can whatch Joe Gibbs on Tod's Workshop's channel struggling whit it... Also, it's a modern engineering idea, you can't just place in history
Yeah, the best part of the instant legolas is being able to shoot cheaper bolts, and having the front lever to stabilize the bow better, increasing accuracy, all of that without training. Still, all in all good. Plus the possible iron sights attachment. Slav technique looks dope tho. At closer range, or against a mob of enemies, it's definitely worth the decreased accuracy.
Thanks. This video is mostly focusing on historical repeating bows that did exist in history rather than modern designs. In this case Chinese chukunu and Greek polybolos
The painting in 1:12 depicts Korean soldiers shooting repeating crossbows on a ship during the Japanese Invasion of Korea in 1597. Unfortunately the painting was commissioned in the 1900s by the Japanese Navy and it is filled with inaccuracies. Koreans never had a repeating crossbow nor used one. The painting is the artist's depiction.
according to Drawing of a Sunogi, from nineteenth century 'Hungug Sinjo Gigye Doseol (《훈국신조기계도설》 or 《訓局新造器械圖說》)'. Korean version of repeating crossbow can be called a Suno (수노 or 手弩, hand crossbow), Sunogung (수노기 or 手弩弓, hand crossbow) or Sunogi (수노기 or 手弩機, lit. 'Hand crossbow machine') and follows the same basic design as Chinese Zhu Ge Nu. Nevertheless, Sunogi has several modifications that set it apart from, and arguably make it superior to, the Chinese version.
One fascinating thing I find about this discussion is a lot of the points brought up are also why lever action rifles weren’t in widespread military use during their heyday, like the potential wasting of ammunition, the added complexity, the fact that the rate of fire wouldn’t necessarily be that much higher (in this case due to smoke from black powder obscuring the target), and the fact that lever actions weren’t as powerful as single shots (at least until the Winchester 1886). However, unlike the repeating crossbow, the lever actions did get widespread civilian use on the frontier, and militaries did eventually move to repeating guns like lever actions and semi auto in just a few decades. Though firearms tech advanced very very quickly in the 19th and early 20th century, so that may be why. Weapons tech was comparatively less speedy before (and even after, really).
@@HistoricalWeapons Yeah, or even widespread civilian gun ownership on frontier lands, which was what made the Winchesters so popular. The fact that most of them could swap ammo with the revolvers of the day carried for personal protection also helped. Doubt the Chinese Empires allowed ordinary subjects to walk around with repeating crossbows.
the real advantage of instant legolas is possibility to use rubber or other weaker bow to enable the archer to use heavier bow or just make drawing the same bow archer used before but much less tiring.
Imagine you are a general, equip your archers with this weapon and after a minute hear the message "one of your units has used up all its arrows" but the enemy only lost 10/1000 life
The biggest reason that is massively understated here is that archers weren't actually put into frantic positions very often. Very rarely would they be exceeding 3-4 arrows per second, simply because each arrow had a cost. They were more tactically used to keep distance and to thin an army as they approached. Once combat actually started, the archers would ditch their bows and help in the brawl. The only reason speed is a factor in modern weapons is because they are more effective, more accurate, and the ammo is much cheaper. When you fire a 5.56 machine gun, each bullet doesn't have to be made by a person that took an hour or so out of their day to do so. Even if you assume the fastest possible manufacturing times for a traditional english arrow, you are still looking at about 50 minutes per arrow made (5m to forge the arrow head, 8m to round the shaft, 3m to seat the arrow head, 10m to fletch the shaft, another 20m to string the fletching, and finally a good 3-5m to coat the arrow shaft and fletchings).
*Per minute, not per second. If they were even capable of 3-4 arrows per second, I have a feeling that the first nation to develope that technique would have long since conquered the world... It's a funny enough typo that I'm leaving it in tho.
Hello! I do not think you are right on this one, but we can not be sure about a thing like this. There are too many advantages of the device Tod received: The release helps a lot for the inexperinced, but helps with high power for the experienced shooters The "medival letoff" helps to sustain full power shots, and aim properly with the sights The sights helps a lot for the inexperienced, together with the "medival letoff" killer duo The assist bow increases power for everybody, the device don't have to be changed, change the bows only The shorter arrows are way cheaper to manufacture I would mention 3 important factors what I think you have not considered: You could give the device for non archer fighters, with minimal training. I am talking about good/elite melee soldiers, who are strong, but now have more range. They would not take regular archery, but this type? I think hell yes. We should consider looong wars, when good archers die in numbers in the first few years. Without a device like this you can not replace them. Finally specialised units: with superhuman training and talent you can match a normal strong guy with a few month training. So if there is a role for a smaller group of fast and heavy shooting archers... You can have them, on demand, repeatably. We should see what Tod and others come up with in design. Joerg is only the inventor, lot of improvements are coming.
Excellent. I think I agree with all your points, plus would add that while an archer with a bow can carry loads of arrows within easy reach in a quiver or two, so could keep up the hail of arrows, the Instant legolas shooter has to stop after the 5 or so arrows are shot & carefully reload- thus cancelling the speed advantage.
When I am using the slav draw, I hold the arrows much deeper: nocks can reach my ring finger.So when I holding it, my thumb is more comfortable and I can feel the nock's orientation and adjust it with the end of the ring finger. Normal nocks and wide nocks have little difference when I learn this skill.
The newer versions of the instant legolas do have a huge advantage though, which puts them at an efficiency, where I think they would have been adopted for at least 1/2 of missile troops: the sliding mechanism with the front handle allows to easily hold the bow at full draw, making shooting less tiring and aiming easier. Combine than with the ability to add sights and the device really makes shooting a bow easy for even untrained troops. Definitely superior to the chu ko nu. The only reason I see why it was not used is just that nobody had the foresight to invent it. They simply did not have our context of rapid firing weapons to even think about a hand-held magazine fed weapon. (yes yes chu ko nu, but as I said not as effective as instant legolas) also: I forgot to mention. With the rail-system, you can shoot shorter arrows rather than long arrows, while still having the advantage of a long draw length. Quite nifty I would say.
Many of the points you bring up in the video have actually been addressed by later models of the instant legolas - Joerg continues to ladel on innovations such as load-assist which could up to double your draw weight simply by using a backward facing bow, as well as a forward grip to effortlessly maintain tension on the bow while aiming. The rate at which Joerg Sprave innovates, and proves that his concepts would have been possible in the period proves that it's not the instant legolas which would have changed history... it's a person with Joerg Sprave's mastery of wood engineering who could have changed history.
@@HistoricalWeapons Ah, maybe I was just confused because you have "Instant Legolas" in the name of the video. Yes it is a modern invention, but I think the intent is to show that such devices were possible by someone who lived in that era and was intuitive enough to understand these physical principles. Alternate history kind of thing. Tod's built one using the tech of the era, for example: th-cam.com/video/H-1bkGPAkJU/w-d-xo.html
@@HistoricalWeapons That's odd. The title for the video on my end shows "Why Repeating Bow Devices weren't common in history? Historical Instant Legolas" - that's how I found the video actually. Yours is one of the first video videos that pops up when you search for Instant Legolas. That might be leading to some of the comments being pointed in that direction.
you forgot to mention the instant Legolas takes forever to reload after the magazine is empty, and the ammo capacity is like 5. and it would be almost impossible to make a practical detachable magazine like guns cuz spring/metal technology
@@marcellusbrutus3346 depends on which design of the instant legolas you refer to, tod's workshop is working on a more mideival design that might fix alot of the flaws mentioned, and maybe add new flaws, i dunno
@@gageriddle1681 regardless after you empty your magazine u gotta reload. dont tell me you can make a detachable box magazine using medieval materials and tools
If the English had used the instant legolas instead of longbows at Agincourt, they would've needed to ask the Frogs for a truce between reloading their arrows.
the main reason the english employed the longbow is they are relatively cheap troops for the king to pay. why would the king pay for such complicated legolas weapons that are experimental and require future materials to work effectively? (or two bows instead of rubber bands)
like I said, archers in history can shoot similar speeds, sometimes even faster if you factor in the reload of an SIL. if your gonna include belt fed magazines or stripper clips, thats too ahead of the time
It has been done by the Koreans and we are testing it. The reason why Chinese have few sources doing it is because the Chinese single shot crossbow is vastly more powerful spanned with legs. Such force of 300lbs @ long powerstroke is impossible with arms so therefore the Chinese never took these as serious weapons. It’s like comparing a bolt action rifle with throwing knives
Nobody seems to notice that the speed shooters spend a good amount of time with their eyes on their arrows and bow as opposed to whatever they are shooting at. This is a huge factor that people seem to not realize. Focus. The legolas bow does not require your full focus and attention. You can keep your eyes up and alert. This makes a big difference when it comes to accuracy and awareness of your surroundings. The shooters “can” shoot that fast in a calm and controlled environment. It’s a whole different story when there is chaos all around. The Legolas bow literally requires no thinking.
I think youre missing an important aspect. It was easy to train people on crossbows and instant crossbows. At chinese court i once read they joked a scribe could use the crossbow. A short time to train someone is one of the big reasons why early guns existed alongside bows which were superior. You could replace losses easier and build larger army. So guns kept spreading but why didnt repeater crossbows in 400 bc?
Also goin on the armor unless you have a 200lbs crossbow at best your using a hook and styprup or a ratchet, unfortunately they lack the punch in order to defeat even the most basic armor which was gambison armor which can even resist a British longbow to a certain extent.
Something often forgotten is that...not everyone can become an archer. I play an online game 'Storm Ops 3' with bows and crossbows. I'm a rifle sharpshooter by instinct and experience, and i don't understand bows, or archery. But i'm quite happy shooting a crossbow as its more like a rifle. I win on Stom Ops 3 using a crossbow, where I could never win using a bow. I don't care how 'realistic' it is, I just enjoy it! Obv. crossbows were used in the middle ages as were bows , while mounted archers became ultra proficient with the recurve bow. But give me a crossbow any day! I just like them!
ancient archers were trained. if you want emergency soldiers, just give them a spear,, the instant legolas does not solve ancient problems because of logistics
You forgot to mention another fact that might now be too important but at least noteable. And thats the fact that one of his designs includes using a reversed bow infront if the bow used to sort of "trick" the mechanism into making the process if pulling and firing the arrow feel lighter due to the bow in the front, but still has the exact same poundage as the main bow. Other archers and bowmen can probably explain the process better than i
Very true fact, either way it should be mentioned that with the type if poundage bows that the english used. Im a bit dubious that they would be able to fire as quickly as the examples you showed using pure skill alone, plus geographically speaking those techniques werent really there for them to be exposed to.
@@gageriddle1681 the ideas are just too ahead of its time. At the time when peasants barely have enough food for himself how can you arm massive armies with this? I'd rather give them all spears
@@HistoricalWeapons if you were to give the entire British army spears they would have lost against the french, hell, if you gave the british exclusively spears they probably couldve even be taken over by a militia
In your opinion, could a repeating bow be a useful weapon in a SHTF scenario? Obviously in our modern day, firearms are in most ways superior to bows, but in a SHTF scenario, I could see ammunition becoming scarce.
no it doesnt require years of training. kassai horse archery school teachers beginners and they can shoot 1 arrow in a second in a few weeks of training.
I think the main advantage of Legolas is not much training required, not much strength required ( because shoot 20 arrows with a 80kg draw weight Longbow in 20 minutes, and your body just pulled 1.6 ton in 20 minutes... very tiring ) and enemy cannot shoot back your short arrows but you can if you take out your legolas. The disadvantage is price and maintenance but i believe that it could have been a revolution in some parts of the world because ( if you can afford to produce it in large numbers) it allows you to field a large force of effective archers without having to train them for years to achieve this efficiency : In the steppes or in some parts of the middle east, it would not have changed anything because most of their archers were trained from a young age to hunt with a bow so they were naturally skilled archers for war as adults however for instance in Japan ( masses of ashigarus with legolas..bye bye yumi samurais) or in some parts of Europe , I believe that it would have had a large impact but i could be wrong.
Don't see how it's more complicated than any of the historic repeating crossbows shown in this video or believe it's a valid reason why it couldn't have been mass produced ?
1- Slavic release probably learned from Turkic people during Avar,bulgar, pecheng, cuman, hungary-turco, tatar and kypcaks after 15th century most obvious from ottomans. 2- Nomadic nature lives mostly warrior culture, for examples Turks other name is Oghuz (arrow clans) they use the arrow and bow for their clan names. Matter fact all Turkic have arrow or bow related clans names. as for this nature they tend to stick with traditional manner which is easy manner. Giving the fact that they lived on harsh environment all the time dirt and weather condition can easily harm the bow and arrows. So using a mechanism doesn't have value on them if it's stuck middle of the battle. as for rapid shooting It’s documented that in Manzikert battle each warrior was carrying about 100 arrows, put in the quiver, the bow case and even in the boots. Also In a battle against I. Crusade army the knights had to stand a 3 hours uninterrupted arrow attack of Seljuk army. It was Count Raymond who came to help with his army and saved them from a total destruction. Turks used the famous Turkish rapid firing technic to shoot 10 arrows while enemy even shot 1- (El-Cahiz Menâkıb Cünd el-Hilafe ve Fuza'il el Etrak- caliphat military of Turk army) seljuk coin rapid bow (pinterest.com/pin/543880092498354237/) 3- another is yes why bother short range bow while you can shoot very fast bow in 100 meter away that can pierce the middle age armor.
China has the highest world population. Something tells me this has been constant historically, so when having that many people, a greater technological advance could be better than training for a lifetime, both in order for you to shoot faster. It also means a ruler could have an advantage against another one, then taking his lands in consequence.
yes but technology doesnt always mean they will win wars. there are a few important turning points where inferior technology (brute force） will trump technology
the truth is the repeating crossbow are not like what we saw the replica ppl are making, they are actually huge siege weapon in ancient China. its big and heavy, and its not convenient for soldiers to carry around
ok, but just because there would be plenty of situations where a normal bow would be preferable, doesn't mean that there wouldn't be critical situations where having the capability of the instant legolas would completely alter strategy.
@@HistoricalWeapons one thing is, they weren't as good as the instant legolas is, so that may factor in to the reasons why,,, when it comes down to choosing bow or repeating bow, the repeating bow will have disadvantages, and then something tips the scales,,, but these disadvantages vary.
@@tsmspace OF course it wasn't as good, you are using modern people with modern tools and modern gun ideas to make an ancient weapon. If weapon engineers went back in time we could of armed them all with automatic machines and conquer the world lol
@@tsmspace I think my original title was misleading asking if Legolas was historical? What do you think of the new title? " Why repeating bow devices were not common in history?"
that expert archers can shoot fast doesnt matter. Because if you can have 10 peasants, each shooting xbows as accurate as your 1 expert archer well, game over. Same applies to SIL bow. Its not meant to replace an expert archer, but turn peasants into usable archers.
Hi. The fire rate of ancient archers are effectively the same as repeating bows because you have to load the repeater and that is slow. The historical ones did not have detachable magazines and usually had a ammo capacity of around 5 arrows. The Chinese did employ them so why wasn't it spread to the rest of the world
@@HistoricalWeapons hi man. Yeah but what is the fire rate of a peasant? look, I think you are wrong on this one. It probably will have its niche. You have good archers? well then you dont need it. You dont have good archers? well then it certainly wouldve helped.
@@Jossnaz hi I think it really depended on the culture. For example almost all nomadic cultures in central Asia knew how to shoot arrows. In general for Europe peasants were generally spearmen, same in east Asia. Generally speaking, When archers where employed they were always somewhat trained. The last thing you want is having untrained archers that will accidentally shoot their own men.
Well even in qin dynasty just a normal crossbow device The tribal invader using just horseback archery to outflank crossbow army So the qin change strategy A peasant crossbow may be effective for ocerwhelming battlefield with many arrows as possible But the tribes have too much better manuverable quickly spread and attack from further away
i totaly forgot we could simply just shoot as fast. i mean sure you can build a device for a peasant to shoot this thing but why invest so much money on a device on pesants? they are just run. it wasnt until u had guns when they could penetrate armour
the chu ko nu have low accuracy, and short draw string, end up piercing not very well. in the result, it only work in close range, eliminate the reason of the whole archery thing. the volley long bow is better at all aspect, so chu ko nu only have a suprise factor for a short brief time of history. it can work in a small fight / raiding, assassin spec op mission, but in the scale of a battle, its rendering useless.
Why not popular? Well, Reloading Time!!! Lets say, Repeating bow able to shoot 20 arrows in 10 second, with reloading of 20 arrows assume took 5 minutes. Regular bow able to shoot 5 arrows in 30 second (average), and in 5 minutes?? 50 arrow.
The Chinese repeating crossbow was ingenious but not powerful enough ... why didn't they make a bigger version? A "big repeater" could have worked like a foot bow. You lie on your back and aim the bow with your feet. You operate the handle with both arms. This configuration is symmetric and requires little training. As a bonus, you present less of a target to the enemy. In fact, the bow might include a small shield that you place your feet against. Compared to the original design, you just make it bigger and attach a rope or strap to the butt. This goes around your neck to oppose foot force. Of course, this configuration is impossible to perform on horseback, so the Mongols wouldn't have spread this "big repeater" either.
they did but the main limitation is manpower. you get tired pulling so much weight. if u use the original single shot crossbow you have a more reliable weapon and the crossbowman can take breaks during reload. even in ww2 the bolt action rifle was the most common rifle compared to the semi auto rifle, why? simplifcity
@@HistoricalWeapons Thanks for the historical perspective. But I find it interesting - the Chinese single shot crossbow was surely more expensive, because of the bronze lock. The wood corners of the repeater would be less expensive I'd think. In WW2, bolt action rifles were less expensive and more reliable than most semi-autos; the US Garand was a lucky exception. But all of the world's militaries quickly turned to even cheaper and simpler submachine-guns. Most of them didn't even have a hammer and firing pin - just a bump on the bolt that banged into the round's primer as it slammed closed. I feel like the repeater crossbow is similar. It lacks a sophisticated trigger mechanism. It just releases the string when you slam the operating lever down.
There is a huge misunderstanding here, because the actual historical fact is that Chinese repeating crossbows were very common in China ever since the 战国 period almost 3000 yrs ago.
arrows were hard to make... well instead of training 3 hours a day to learn to shoot 7 arrows at once off a 15 pound bow, they could invest that time in building arrows and still have time left to have a beer with their mates. Just kidding with the 7 arrows off the light bow (good job with that), although that argument still stands... those/cho-ko-nus are all weakish bows compared to real war bows. But a skilled archer will put hours and hours into training, that a SIL archer doesnt need. Same goes for the beer, the king/landlord/whatever... ancient business guy ... will give the peasants/warriors SILs and let them work on the field for the time they save on training archery :P LOL probably true... as TOD said, they werent idiots back then. Or does the army nowadays spend a significant time on shooting lessons... they do train it regularely, but far less than in medieval times, I am sure. Counter argument for the peasant having these is that maybe the weapon would have been seen so powerfull, at least until you loosened all the arrows, that it would have been banned for them.
I'm not buyin the 'archers could already shoot that fast' argument. Showing little boys playing with 12lb bows and puny little modern target arrows is silly. Get period accurate equipment including bows that are a typical weight used in battle (not a typical weight you would give a child to practice with) and see how fast you can shoot that one.
The analogy is wrong. This innovation makes any man an "literally an archer". More soldiers with simplistic process is more effective and efficient. The more archers trained the less training are there. The instant legolas solved the problems of the ancient times. You cannot compare it from theirs in the ancient times. Try it brother
and speed shooting is on weaker bows, and not to full draw length. and the chu ko nu is a lot less accurate than other crossbows, as joerg said in a video. as opposed to the sil, which is full drawlength, can be on heavy bows and still be fast, and i think is more accurate than crossbows. chu ko nus are clearly faster (and full draw) than speed shooting, and so is the sil. replaceable by javelins? they are totally different, and require way more skill and are far less accurate.
the original Instant Legolas are made with modern materials such as screws and springs. I know he made one that is more historically feasible but that version is very complicated to make. Also jack's main point here is crucial, that archers back then could shoot similar speeds. keep in mind after the depletion of the magazine your reload is very slow
the sil is not feasible with heavy bows because your powering it with your muscles. look at all the instant Legolas devices with warbows and how slow they are firing after 4 shots
Throwing heavy javelins at close range before a charge did not take that much skill, since your enemy's speed is added on. that's why they were a common ranged weapon before a melee engagement. I compared javelins and throwing axes because they are more effective as a melee weapon. In practice with a SIL you need to drop the weapon right before a melee engagement hence it would most likely break after the battle. the bow has less moving parts hence less likely to break say if someone steps on it.
Change history, maybe not but it should have a spot in history if invented in medieval times. Both east and west had complicated crossbows which were harder to maintain, which means simplicity is only acceptable in peace. Times of war and you face an enemy whose all on horseback and all good archers, then any device that could give an advantage would be tested out. We can only guess what would happen but that's the fun. Looking forward to channels that would test out all these weapons on different scenarios, against different armor.
@@seanc9520the Chinese repeating crossbows gives us a glimpse how Europeans would of used these things. the problem with having a warbow repeater is that it is just too tiring to shoot for a battle besides facing off a direct charge
This is bullshit. The advantages of the germans repeating bow is ease of use not rate of fire. The reason the gun took off wasn't rate of fire or cheap production (which is also bullshit as it wouldn't cost as much as a bow and would last 5 or 6 bows at least). Believe me if someone had invented that it would have been used.
This verse is about saints Revelation 14:12 12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.
Imagine you are a general, equip your archers with this weapon and after a minute hear the message "one of your units has used up all its arrows" but the enemy only lost 10/1000 life
Ancient archers didn't need an instant Legolas because they were already Legolas in spirit,mind and body.
I agree don't forget a repeating machine requires reloading the magazine and all existing designs don't have detachable magazines
wrg,idts
Harder to train and you can't even shoot in difficult position, and also if you load a crossbow you can shot it every time as long it's loaded no need to take arrows from your quiver, if people back then develops crossbows early and understand how advantageous crossbows can they might be warped the entire history easily.
EXCELLENT 🙂😎👍
Man, imagine the balls of the rider and horse to act as a moving target.
how can they move with such big balls
Are you assuming the horse gender? ;)
She could be a mare.
@@theokrisna how can she move with such big eggs
Who said he was riding a horse?
no such thing as ballx or etc, ts not good, cepitxux yx etc, do, can do any nmw an dnay s perfx
I agree with all your points, but you forgot one thing
The instant Legolas can shoot shorter arrows. They're easier to make, and your enemies can't take them and shoot them back.
Great vid!
Yeah, but you also can't shoot the enemies arrows back at them either. :D
Thanks man. Also one could just use a crossbow or overdraw device
@@gizmonomono run out of short arrows, then remove the legolas device and then you can shoot normal arrows back.
@@gizmonomono shorter bolts are easier to make too, but then we get into theoreticals (the Mongolia used all their industrial might to producing short bolts, they would easily outlast in a long battle)
@@gizmonomono i guess you can use any arrow smaller than the device.Use the same bow as your enemy,but carry small arrows:he can't use yours,but you can use theirs because they fit in the device
Build an 240lb footpowered instant leg-olas
man i can just imagine leg-ouchhhhh-
The focus of this video is on arrow repeaters that did exist in history...why were they not widely adopted?
When the mongols conquered china, why didn't they use their repeating crossbows and spread them to europe??
The quick answer is their archers shot just as fast, since when the repeater's magazine is empty it takes long time to reload.
Maybe can built a power assist version of the IL. You already have a 240lbs bow, so maybe use a 100lbs bow to reduce the stress and make it to more human usable levels.
It will be not easy to carry, but maybe as a siege defense weapon?
@@seanc9520 I want to make an instant LEG - olas. foot powered repeater
Interesting, Joerg's reply mentions how after he made the first version after 2017, now there is more people out there interested and willing to test out and mod the design to different types. If you can get the 240lbs bow to single person operate levels without needing superhuman strength. Then the heavy bolts fired would be an interesting case study
I mean longbows are known to reduce in efficiency after a certain poundage but what about bolts shot using an IL? Would a heavy bolt shot using a 240lbs bow be better or worst than an arrow?
the Chinese repeater has one important advantage compared to the instant Legolas, it's magazine is gravity fed so you don't need a spring on top blocking you when you reload, hence faster reload speed. Unfortunately for the IL, it is the slowest to reload compared to other devices. 5 arrows inside is negliable as a practical battlefield weapon
Repeating crossbows were very cool, but we’re generally not used as the faster something fires generally the less penetrative power you have. And for much of history armor was the big Trump card that armies used.
As for cost, Chinese repeating crossbows were actually very cheap and given the lever you used far less strength to use. But weren’t common for the reasons mentioned. Good against Calvary and in sieges or boarding actions, but generally a niche weapon.
yes the more rapid it is, the less weight it is because humans operate it
by the way there were large chinese repeating crossbows similar to artillery. these have the power
Here are features of instant legolas that differentiate them from old repeating devices:
-detachable from bow (can use it to fire enemy arrows back when enemy can't.
-has sights, great repeating accuracy with minimal training.
-design is actually simple and can be made from wood only.
-you can have poundage of a longbow with draw assist without sacrificing rate of power (no need to spend years of training to operate).
If you armed armed a militia with this and fire in ranks you can make it rain with arrows on enemy formation. while they have to be covered with shields, your cav can run them over.
Archery techniques to reach that rate of fire require lot of training and weaker bows. IF you can replace years of training with relatively cheap wood device and turn your disposable peasant into soldier on par with trained archers why wouldn't you? Also peasant is less likely to turn and run when they are just shooting enemy from a safe distance making them cheap and effective force. With assist It also draws much faster with then any heavy crossbow. I think old repeater crossbows didn't had that kind of power.
With a reload time of 5 to 10 seconds - I don't think you would even have to fire in ranks. By the time you are in your 2nd or third reload the entire force would be putting downrange constant non-stop fire.
This analysis is solely on historical repeaters . The instant Legolas was just an intro
I think you made Points. But as Roman Legionary/ Roman Officer. Naw.
Just raise shields. Keep moving. Cavalry under friendly fire attacking a blocky formation? Sure. But no. Friendly fire isn’t worth the chance.
When you stop loosing arrows. Is when the formation breaks open in seconds. Throwing Pilum at incoming cavalry or prepare to watch a Blood Bath as Armoured Man and Horse fight to the death. Literally. Bloody battle.
Sure their has been cases of Cavalry utterly annihilating cohorts and even a legion or two. But I’d argue cavalry does less damage to well equipped armies then Cavalry themselves. Which Cav to Cav warfare is said to be So Horrifying that many countries would simply not do it. It wasn’t even an agreement. It was just known.
Of course…. Cav still fights cav
@@muaadeeb9625 speed clips my bruh "let me show you it's features"
"man, Joergs instant Legolas sure got people talking about archery. Nobody would mind if I use the popularity to talk about historical ingenuity, right"
Bet ya didn't expect this many people to react passionately hehe
Guys, be respectful in the chat. It's not like he is talking smack about the invention.
I think the real reason the repeating weapons didn't take off is, is that to get a repeating weapon with out various drawbacks requires not just one or two innovations, but an entire series of them. We can see this with gunpowder weapons, that had to go through many steps to get to where they are now. For instance even though repeater weapons existed in WW1 a full transition couldn't occur until after that because sufficiently reliable designs for rifle powered variants mostly didn't happen until after the war, this despite having worked on the problem for decades already. Thus one only saw the deployment occur after the war instead, though even in WW2 substantially amounts of bolt actions remained.
Basically conceiving of all the concepts needed for a good repeating bow, while also having the time, or tools to keep iterating till you get a viable design would probably have been quite time consuming and with no clear view on how to get to a good enough result unless you could conceive of all the things that would be possible as we can now with our completed transition in guns.
This is especially relevant as once you did manage to complete a reliable repeating bow setup, it would actually be possible to give it a power assist system as well, as was demonstrated. This would have helped fire higher draw weights then at high speed. Which would have let one finally eliminate all drawbacks aside of the higher weight and maintenance/construction issues, but those would finally be offset by superior performance and easier training regimes allowing for quicker deployment of new troops.
But it's a quite a set of ideas to get from start to finish as one can see, so I think it might as such never have happened as no one could conceive of the end goal being realistic. Arguably one could even point out that in modern times with repeating guns everywhere it still took quite awhile for some one to conceive of this.
yes I agree with you and the mongols did not spread these repeaters to the rest of the world because they valued their horse archers and the chukunu is useless for their military doctrine. as to the ancient greek polybolos, its a forgotten weapon so never got spread
Thanks for an answer after all this time still. And a good point on how the Mongols never did spread the repeating crossbows either.
explained very well. Keep in mind, an army that travels in all weather does not want to take along complicated equipment that can be damaged on the way. Early Horn crossbows for example had the problem that the glue used on the prod would delaminate in wet conditions. Repeating crossbows had many parts that fail, comparied to a stick and a string.
Good explanations for why they weren't used historically, but Jorge's Instant Legolas eliminates some of the drawbacks. With the draw assist, the IL could allow an archer to use a 20-30% more powerful bow. It is apparently more accurate than historical repeaters as well, as someone new to the device got a shot grouping that could be covered with one hand at 10 meter range. And it is very easy to learn how to use.
thanks
Nothing of this takes merit away from the instant legolas, it's much easier, cheaper and simpler to make than a crossbow, and crossbows were used a lot in medieval ages, yet the instant legolas shoots much faster than a crossbow or any bow regardless of the archer's training. As for reloading joerg already made a simple stripper clip with bolts. It takes you five seconds at most to reload if you are just decent at it. Composite bows with the stuff joerg has come up with would have been an absolute nightmare for any opponent. It would have rendered simple bows obsolete except on special circumstances where your line of fire needs close parabolic shots. Firearms would have been used much less too and would have developed much slower since they would only be useful to penetrate armor, something not so relevant in battle when a line of peasants can rain the sky with arrows, that's not pleasant whether you are armored or not. Nations would have quickly implented the production of these things, they are cheaper and simpler to make than any firearm or crossbow of the time and their rate of fire is ridiculous, add a counterbow with less draw weight to help you increase the draw weight if you want to get fancy. This invention would have totally changed history and delay extensively Gunpowder development on firearms (but not cannons).
right. Even if the ancient greeks figured out a repeating bow, that doesn't mean that during the medieval period people knew about it. some advance made the repeating bows that the greeks had figured out obsolete, so they were lost from technology. Then, there was a thousand years of people not properly sharing information. Just because the machine is possible with medieval technology, and just because someone had figured out something similar a thousand years before then, doesn't mean that the right people had the knowledge at the right time for it to matter. It is still arguable that it would have been used and made significant impact in strategy and outcome.
Hi this video is not about alternative history. This video is focusing on the repeating bows that did exist in history. Which is only in China/Korea and Greece. The legolas bow was just an intro. Keep in mind during the medieval period the Mongols did see Chinese using Repeating crossbows and gunpowder, so why was only gunpowder spread to Europe?
BTW, all repeating bows have to be reloaded after and look at the magazine chamber, it is blocked by a spring. It is slow to reload
the uploader is not talking about the instant Legolas, he is talking about the Chinese repeater and the greek polybolos. the instant Legolas was just an intro to spark intrest
Instant legolas is way more complicated than a crossbow, and way less effective. In horseback It would be so fragile or so heavy that it wouldn't be useful, and with heavy bows... well you can whatch Joe Gibbs on Tod's Workshop's channel struggling whit it... Also, it's a modern engineering idea, you can't just place in history
Yeah, the best part of the instant legolas is being able to shoot cheaper bolts, and having the front lever to stabilize the bow better, increasing accuracy, all of that without training. Still, all in all good. Plus the possible iron sights attachment.
Slav technique looks dope tho. At closer range, or against a mob of enemies, it's definitely worth the decreased accuracy.
Thanks. This video is mostly focusing on historical repeating bows that did exist in history rather than modern designs. In this case Chinese chukunu and Greek polybolos
Damn that guy riding with a target on his back is brave @0:31
The painting in 1:12 depicts Korean soldiers shooting repeating crossbows on a ship during the Japanese Invasion of Korea in 1597. Unfortunately the painting was commissioned in the 1900s by the Japanese Navy and it is filled with inaccuracies. Koreans never had a repeating crossbow nor used one. The painting is the artist's depiction.
according to Drawing of a Sunogi, from nineteenth century 'Hungug Sinjo Gigye Doseol (《훈국신조기계도설》 or 《訓局新造器械圖說》)'.
Korean version of repeating crossbow can be called a Suno (수노 or 手弩, hand crossbow), Sunogung (수노기 or 手弩弓, hand crossbow) or Sunogi (수노기 or 手弩機, lit. 'Hand crossbow machine') and follows the same basic design as Chinese Zhu Ge Nu. Nevertheless, Sunogi has several modifications that set it apart from, and arguably make it superior to, the Chinese version.
One fascinating thing I find about this discussion is a lot of the points brought up are also why lever action rifles weren’t in widespread military use during their heyday, like the potential wasting of ammunition, the added complexity, the fact that the rate of fire wouldn’t necessarily be that much higher (in this case due to smoke from black powder obscuring the target), and the fact that lever actions weren’t as powerful as single shots (at least until the Winchester 1886).
However, unlike the repeating crossbow, the lever actions did get widespread civilian use on the frontier, and militaries did eventually move to repeating guns like lever actions and semi auto in just a few decades. Though firearms tech advanced very very quickly in the 19th and early 20th century, so that may be why. Weapons tech was comparatively less speedy before (and even after, really).
The reason is joules of power which is significantly higher
@@HistoricalWeapons Yeah, or even widespread civilian gun ownership on frontier lands, which was what made the Winchesters so popular. The fact that most of them could swap ammo with the revolvers of the day carried for personal protection also helped.
Doubt the Chinese Empires allowed ordinary subjects to walk around with repeating crossbows.
Meanwhile an experienced chukono operator disapproves in the background
the real advantage of instant legolas is possibility to use rubber or other weaker bow to enable the archer to use heavier bow or just make drawing the same bow archer used before but much less tiring.
This video is about why existing repeating bows did not get widely adopted
Also rubber was invented during the industrial revolution. Small bows could be given to other people instead
Imagine you are a general, equip your archers with this weapon and after a minute hear the message "one of your units has used up all its arrows" but the enemy only lost 10/1000 life
The biggest reason that is massively understated here is that archers weren't actually put into frantic positions very often. Very rarely would they be exceeding 3-4 arrows per second, simply because each arrow had a cost. They were more tactically used to keep distance and to thin an army as they approached. Once combat actually started, the archers would ditch their bows and help in the brawl.
The only reason speed is a factor in modern weapons is because they are more effective, more accurate, and the ammo is much cheaper. When you fire a 5.56 machine gun, each bullet doesn't have to be made by a person that took an hour or so out of their day to do so. Even if you assume the fastest possible manufacturing times for a traditional english arrow, you are still looking at about 50 minutes per arrow made (5m to forge the arrow head, 8m to round the shaft, 3m to seat the arrow head, 10m to fletch the shaft, another 20m to string the fletching, and finally a good 3-5m to coat the arrow shaft and fletchings).
*Per minute, not per second. If they were even capable of 3-4 arrows per second, I have a feeling that the first nation to develope that technique would have long since conquered the world... It's a funny enough typo that I'm leaving it in tho.
Hello!
I do not think you are right on this one, but we can not be sure about a thing like this.
There are too many advantages of the device Tod received:
The release helps a lot for the inexperinced, but helps with high power for the experienced shooters
The "medival letoff" helps to sustain full power shots, and aim properly with the sights
The sights helps a lot for the inexperienced, together with the "medival letoff" killer duo
The assist bow increases power for everybody, the device don't have to be changed, change the bows only
The shorter arrows are way cheaper to manufacture
I would mention 3 important factors what I think you have not considered: You could give the device for non archer fighters, with minimal training. I am talking about good/elite melee soldiers, who are strong, but now have more range. They would not take regular archery, but this type? I think hell yes. We should consider looong wars, when good archers die in numbers in the first few years. Without a device like this you can not replace them. Finally specialised units: with superhuman training and talent you can match a normal strong guy with a few month training. So if there is a role for a smaller group of fast and heavy shooting archers... You can have them, on demand, repeatably.
We should see what Tod and others come up with in design. Joerg is only the inventor, lot of improvements are coming.
hi, this video is not about the instant legolas but the historical crossbows that did exist
5:10 when you get to 1000 proficiency with bows in M&B.
lol
Excellent. I think I agree with all your points, plus would add that while an archer with a bow can carry loads of arrows within easy reach in a quiver or two, so could keep up the hail of arrows, the Instant legolas shooter has to stop after the 5 or so arrows are shot & carefully reload- thus cancelling the speed advantage.
Thanks. Just keep in mind the focus of this video is on historical repeaters, not the instant legolas
When I am using the slav draw, I hold the arrows much deeper: nocks can reach my ring finger.So when I holding it, my thumb is more comfortable and I can feel the nock's orientation and adjust it with the end of the ring finger. Normal nocks and wide nocks have little difference when I learn this skill.
yes
Good job, I still like those devices on the slingshot channel
the rapid reload device is more likely to attached to a large crossbow or a ballista in a castle defence purpose or a siege situation
The newer versions of the instant legolas do have a huge advantage though, which puts them at an efficiency, where I think they would have been adopted for at least 1/2 of missile troops: the sliding mechanism with the front handle allows to easily hold the bow at full draw, making shooting less tiring and aiming easier. Combine than with the ability to add sights and the device really makes shooting a bow easy for even untrained troops. Definitely superior to the chu ko nu.
The only reason I see why it was not used is just that nobody had the foresight to invent it. They simply did not have our context of rapid firing weapons to even think about a hand-held magazine fed weapon. (yes yes chu ko nu, but as I said not as effective as instant legolas)
also: I forgot to mention. With the rail-system, you can shoot shorter arrows rather than long arrows, while still having the advantage of a long draw length. Quite nifty I would say.
Video is about historical repeaters not the instant Legolas
Many of the points you bring up in the video have actually been addressed by later models of the instant legolas - Joerg continues to ladel on innovations such as load-assist which could up to double your draw weight simply by using a backward facing bow, as well as a forward grip to effortlessly maintain tension on the bow while aiming.
The rate at which Joerg Sprave innovates, and proves that his concepts would have been possible in the period proves that it's not the instant legolas which would have changed history... it's a person with Joerg Sprave's mastery of wood engineering who could have changed history.
Hi this video is an analysis on historical repeating devices, instead of focusing on modern inventions
@@HistoricalWeapons Ah, maybe I was just confused because you have "Instant Legolas" in the name of the video.
Yes it is a modern invention, but I think the intent is to show that such devices were possible by someone who lived in that era and was intuitive enough to understand these physical principles. Alternate history kind of thing. Tod's built one using the tech of the era, for example: th-cam.com/video/H-1bkGPAkJU/w-d-xo.html
@@alexjgilpinwhere did u find the video? The title here doesn't have Legolas, only mentioned in the beginning as an intro
@@HistoricalWeapons That's odd. The title for the video on my end shows "Why Repeating Bow Devices weren't common in history? Historical Instant Legolas" - that's how I found the video actually. Yours is one of the first video videos that pops up when you search for Instant Legolas. That might be leading to some of the comments being pointed in that direction.
Waiting for Joerg, Shad, Nu, and Tod to see this video XD
Nu was kinda skeptical on Tod's legolas video, but I kinda agree on his comments.
Hi this video is focusing on historical repeaters, not the instant Legolas. That was just an intro
You should really do more videos bro, you’re very knowledgeable.
Does pulling a longbow string requiere less effort when using an instant legolas? Could we shoot a really heavy longbow when using instant legolas?
already done but instant legolas is not historical. my channel talks about historical crossbows not modern inventions
you forgot to mention the instant Legolas takes forever to reload after the magazine is empty, and the ammo capacity is like 5. and it would be almost impossible to make a practical detachable magazine like guns cuz spring/metal technology
even the Chinese repeater is gravity fed, not sideways fed, so no giant spring blocking it on the top
@@marcellusbrutus3346 depends on which design of the instant legolas you refer to, tod's workshop is working on a more mideival design that might fix alot of the flaws mentioned, and maybe add new flaws, i dunno
@@gageriddle1681 regardless after you empty your magazine u gotta reload. dont tell me you can make a detachable box magazine using medieval materials and tools
@@siberiaacoustic can you imagine shooting a gatling crossbow lol
Wonder how to enlarge magazine
If the English had used the instant legolas instead of longbows at Agincourt, they would've needed to ask the Frogs for a truce between reloading their arrows.
the main reason the english employed the longbow is they are relatively cheap troops for the king to pay. why would the king pay for such complicated legolas weapons that are experimental and require future materials to work effectively? (or two bows instead of rubber bands)
2:23 Damn, your talent is awesome!
This point was talked about with other people who have a doctrine in medieval Time and they all said it would change the way the world was back then.
like I said, archers in history can shoot similar speeds, sometimes even faster if you factor in the reload of an SIL. if your gonna include belt fed magazines or stripper clips, thats too ahead of the time
Whay not attaching a heavy prod to a chu ko nu? What is the upper limit weight it could resist?
It has been done by the Koreans and we are testing it. The reason why Chinese have few sources doing it is because the Chinese single shot crossbow is vastly more powerful spanned with legs. Such force of 300lbs @ long powerstroke is impossible with arms so therefore the Chinese never took these as serious weapons. It’s like comparing a bolt action rifle with throwing knives
An interesting discussion.
Thanks
Amazing video and good response to the repeating bow video craze!
thanks
man teach me speed shooitng
he has tutorials
Will make more Vids
totally agree, excellent video
good luck finding bow makers willing to make such a device consistently, so yeah good points
Ive made my own Chinese crossbows before. Planning to build a long powerstoke version using historical materials
they are not hard to make, specially the Qing dynasty variants were usually built by local woodworkers, often with limited bowmaking experience.
@@HistoricalWeapons Its also a matter of pride, not every artisan embrace new ideas after all
Nobody seems to notice that the speed shooters spend a good amount of time with their eyes on their arrows and bow as opposed to whatever they are shooting at. This is a huge factor that people seem to not realize. Focus.
The legolas bow does not require your full focus and attention. You can keep your eyes up and alert. This makes a big difference when it comes to accuracy and awareness of your surroundings.
The shooters “can” shoot that fast in a calm and controlled environment. It’s a whole different story when there is chaos all around. The Legolas bow literally requires no thinking.
this video is focused on historical repeaters, not SIL
I think youre missing an important aspect. It was easy to train people on crossbows and instant crossbows. At chinese court i once read they joked a scribe could use the crossbow. A short time to train someone is one of the big reasons why early guns existed alongside bows which were superior. You could replace losses easier and build larger army. So guns kept spreading but why didnt repeater crossbows in 400 bc?
nice analysis
I can imagine an ancient roman mafia using repeating crossbows
they used used daggers and ambush u when u least expect
I think the best answer is that they know have the proper knowledge to make this and probably due to the invention of firearm
makes sense at the time the mongols already discovered the Chinese usage of gunpowder and spread it out
Also goin on the armor unless you have a 200lbs crossbow at best your using a hook and styprup or a ratchet, unfortunately they lack the punch in order to defeat even the most basic armor which was gambison armor which can even resist a British longbow to a certain extent.
more or less yes, the repeater devices of history had no change of penetrating armor except the siege variants
really good point
there was onky one?
Something often forgotten is that...not everyone can become an archer. I play an online game 'Storm Ops 3' with bows and crossbows. I'm a rifle sharpshooter by instinct and experience, and i don't understand bows, or archery. But i'm quite happy shooting a crossbow as its more like a rifle. I win on Stom Ops 3 using a crossbow, where I could never win using a bow. I don't care how 'realistic' it is, I just enjoy it! Obv. crossbows were used in the middle ages as were bows , while mounted archers became ultra proficient with the recurve bow. But give me a crossbow any day! I just like them!
ancient archers were trained. if you want emergency soldiers, just give them a spear,, the instant legolas does not solve ancient problems because of logistics
the real reason, ...no tactical situations to demand it!
agreed
the simple bow and arrow is also much easier to carry on campaign.
You forgot to mention another fact that might now be too important but at least noteable. And thats the fact that one of his designs includes using a reversed bow infront if the bow used to sort of "trick" the mechanism into making the process if pulling and firing the arrow feel lighter due to the bow in the front, but still has the exact same poundage as the main bow. Other archers and bowmen can probably explain the process better than i
That bow could be given to another soldier instead
His original design used modern springs or elastic bands which are Industrial
Very true fact, either way it should be mentioned that with the type if poundage bows that the english used. Im a bit dubious that they would be able to fire as quickly as the examples you showed using pure skill alone, plus geographically speaking those techniques werent really there for them to be exposed to.
@@gageriddle1681 the ideas are just too ahead of its time. At the time when peasants barely have enough food for himself how can you arm massive armies with this? I'd rather give them all spears
@@HistoricalWeapons if you were to give the entire British army spears they would have lost against the french, hell, if you gave the british exclusively spears they probably couldve even be taken over by a militia
Wouldn't it be less accurate for fast shots on a moving (armored?) target ? ? ? Cool device for slowing your enemy down though !
🙂😎👍
In your opinion, could a repeating bow be a useful weapon in a SHTF scenario?
Obviously in our modern day, firearms are in most ways superior to bows, but in a SHTF scenario, I could see ammunition becoming scarce.
Rapid shooting a bow requires years of training. A rapid fire crossbow can be effective in the hands of someone trained for just an hour.
no it doesnt require years of training. kassai horse archery school teachers beginners and they can shoot 1 arrow in a second in a few weeks of training.
normal crossbows take longer to load, but are strong enough to penetrate armour. Cho ku nus don't look like their bolts have a lot of force.
what about a sailor on a ship? It seems a good weapon for an amateur soldier.
where do you live in?
It would be like giving .22 7 shot pistols to one side and muskets to the other. On the killing fields, you will need range and power.
I think the main advantage of Legolas is not much training required, not much strength required ( because shoot 20 arrows with a 80kg draw weight Longbow in 20 minutes, and your body just pulled 1.6 ton in 20 minutes... very tiring ) and enemy cannot shoot back your short arrows but you can if you take out your legolas. The disadvantage is price and maintenance but i believe that it could have been a revolution in some parts of the world because ( if you can afford to produce it in large numbers) it allows you to field a large force of effective archers without having to train them for years to achieve this efficiency : In the steppes or in some parts of the middle east, it would not have changed anything because most of their archers were trained from a young age to hunt with a bow so they were naturally skilled archers for war as adults however for instance in Japan ( masses of ashigarus with legolas..bye bye yumi samurais) or in some parts of Europe , I believe that it would have had a large impact but i could be wrong.
Video is about historical repeaters not the instant Legolas
Don't see how it's more complicated than any of the historic repeating crossbows shown in this video or believe it's a valid reason why it couldn't have been mass produced ?
This video as shown on the title is about the analysis of historical repeaters only. The instant Legolas was just an intro
The first Dynasty of China, the Qin dynasty invented this repeating cross bow.
warring states chu actually
Qin is not the first dynasty of china but the first empire of china.
Shooting at the shield instead at the horse 😂
its a modern reenactment. if he shot horse the activists would go crazy
1- Slavic release probably learned from Turkic people during Avar,bulgar, pecheng, cuman, hungary-turco, tatar and kypcaks after 15th century most obvious from ottomans.
2- Nomadic nature lives mostly warrior culture, for examples Turks other name is Oghuz (arrow clans) they use the arrow and bow for their clan names. Matter fact all Turkic have arrow or bow related clans names. as for this nature they tend to stick with traditional manner which is easy manner. Giving the fact that they lived on harsh environment all the time dirt and weather condition can easily harm the bow and arrows. So using a mechanism doesn't have value on them if it's stuck middle of the battle. as for rapid shooting It’s documented that in Manzikert battle each warrior was carrying about 100 arrows, put in the quiver, the bow case and even in the boots. Also In a battle against I. Crusade army the knights had to stand a 3 hours uninterrupted arrow attack of Seljuk army. It was Count Raymond who came to help with his army and saved them from a total destruction. Turks used the famous Turkish rapid firing technic to shoot 10 arrows while enemy even shot 1- (El-Cahiz Menâkıb Cünd el-Hilafe ve Fuza'il el Etrak- caliphat military of Turk army) seljuk coin rapid bow (pinterest.com/pin/543880092498354237/)
3- another is yes why bother short range bow while you can shoot very fast bow in 100 meter away that can pierce the middle age armor.
thanks for your info
Arrows in instant legolas are shorter so cheaper than bow arrows
Yes but the instant Legolas itself is a modern invention and asking why it wasn’t used historically is pointless
China has the highest world population. Something tells me this has been constant historically, so when having that many people, a greater technological advance could be better than training for a lifetime, both in order for you to shoot faster. It also means a ruler could have an advantage against another one, then taking his lands in consequence.
yes but technology doesnt always mean they will win wars. there are a few important turning points where inferior technology (brute force） will trump technology
the truth is the repeating crossbow are not like what we saw the replica ppl are making, they are actually huge siege weapon in ancient China. its big and heavy, and its not convenient for soldiers to carry around
There’s big and small
nice
Repeating crossbow used in ancient times cannot penetrate armour
except the artillery versions
ok, but just because there would be plenty of situations where a normal bow would be preferable, doesn't mean that there wouldn't be critical situations where having the capability of the instant legolas would completely alter strategy.
This video is about why the existing repeating bows did not get widely adopted
The instant Legolas was simply an intro
@@HistoricalWeapons one thing is, they weren't as good as the instant legolas is, so that may factor in to the reasons why,,, when it comes down to choosing bow or repeating bow, the repeating bow will have disadvantages, and then something tips the scales,,, but these disadvantages vary.
@@tsmspace OF course it wasn't as good, you are using modern people with modern tools and modern gun ideas to make an ancient weapon. If weapon engineers went back in time we could of armed them all with automatic machines and conquer the world lol
@@tsmspace I think my original title was misleading asking if Legolas was historical? What do you think of the new title? " Why repeating bow devices were not common in history?"
that expert archers can shoot fast doesnt matter. Because if you can have 10 peasants, each shooting xbows as accurate as your 1 expert archer well, game over. Same applies to SIL bow. Its not meant to replace an expert archer, but turn peasants into usable archers.
Hi. The fire rate of ancient archers are effectively the same as repeating bows because you have to load the repeater and that is slow. The historical ones did not have detachable magazines and usually had a ammo capacity of around 5 arrows. The Chinese did employ them so why wasn't it spread to the rest of the world
@@HistoricalWeapons hi man. Yeah but what is the fire rate of a peasant? look, I think you are wrong on this one. It probably will have its niche. You have good archers? well then you dont need it. You dont have good archers? well then it certainly wouldve helped.
@@Jossnaz hi I think it really depended on the culture. For example almost all nomadic cultures in central Asia knew how to shoot arrows. In general for Europe peasants were generally spearmen, same in east Asia. Generally speaking, When archers where employed they were always somewhat trained. The last thing you want is having untrained archers that will accidentally shoot their own men.
Well even in qin dynasty just a normal crossbow device
The tribal invader using just horseback archery to outflank crossbow army
So the qin change strategy
A peasant crossbow may be effective for ocerwhelming battlefield with many arrows as possible
But the tribes have too much better manuverable quickly spread and attack from further away
i totaly forgot we could simply just shoot as fast. i mean sure you can build a device for a peasant to shoot this thing but why invest so much money on a device on pesants? they are just run. it wasnt until u had guns when they could penetrate armour
I'd rather arm peasants with spears it's cheaper
Unless there's a weapon that can penetrate armour reliably... Oh wait I think I know ~ gunpowder
Yes
the chu ko nu have low accuracy, and short draw string, end up piercing not very well.
in the result, it only work in close range, eliminate the reason of the whole archery thing.
the volley long bow is better at all aspect, so chu ko nu only have a suprise factor for a short brief time of history. it can work in a small fight / raiding, assassin spec op mission, but in the scale of a battle, its rendering useless.
there are artillery chukunu devices that can work with higher power and accuracy
yes
the chinese repeating crossbow is too underpowered to actually do much of a damage
thats because you've looked at the ones made of bamboo limbs only. mount a proper 200lb horn composite bow on it and you got a serious weapon
@@HistoricalWeapons wait they actually do those?
@@jersianaltacc3802 yes
@@HistoricalWeapons good to know
Why not popular?
Well, Reloading Time!!!
Lets say,
Repeating bow able to shoot 20 arrows in 10 second, with reloading of 20 arrows assume took 5 minutes.
Regular bow able to shoot 5 arrows in 30 second (average), and in 5 minutes?? 50 arrow.
yes the magazine too takes time
The Chinese repeating crossbow was ingenious but not powerful enough ... why didn't they make a bigger version?
A "big repeater" could have worked like a foot bow. You lie on your back and aim the bow with your feet. You operate the handle with both arms. This configuration is symmetric and requires little training. As a bonus, you present less of a target to the enemy. In fact, the bow might include a small shield that you place your feet against.
Compared to the original design, you just make it bigger and attach a rope or strap to the butt. This goes around your neck to oppose foot force.
Of course, this configuration is impossible to perform on horseback, so the Mongols wouldn't have spread this "big repeater" either.
they did but the main limitation is manpower. you get tired pulling so much weight. if u use the original single shot crossbow you have a more reliable weapon and the crossbowman can take breaks during reload. even in ww2 the bolt action rifle was the most common rifle compared to the semi auto rifle, why? simplifcity
also the trigger design of the big repeaters cannot handle as much draw weight/powerstroke as a bronze style han crossbow trigger
@@HistoricalWeapons Thanks for the historical perspective. But I find it interesting - the Chinese single shot crossbow was surely more expensive, because of the bronze lock. The wood corners of the repeater would be less expensive I'd think.
In WW2, bolt action rifles were less expensive and more reliable than most semi-autos; the US Garand was a lucky exception. But all of the world's militaries quickly turned to even cheaper and simpler submachine-guns. Most of them didn't even have a hammer and firing pin - just a bump on the bolt that banged into the round's primer as it slammed closed.
I feel like the repeater crossbow is similar. It lacks a sophisticated trigger mechanism. It just releases the string when you slam the operating lever down.
Trained archer shoot fast repeating crossbow and and bow don't need much training.
Agreed
POV at middle age guys, so please don't make argument with ur futuristic idea or ur modernized mindset.
what futuristic ideas? joerg sprave's instant legolas was just the intro. the entire video was about the historical repeating crossbows that did exist
@@HistoricalWeapons I mean for other guys bro...
There is a huge misunderstanding here, because the actual historical fact is that Chinese repeating crossbows were very common in China ever since the 战国 period almost 3000 yrs ago.
the standard crossbow is more common in china, not the repeating crosbow. it was always a niche weapon in china
@@HistoricalWeapons yes, the standard cross bow is more common, but the repeating crossbows were ALSO widely used. That is a fact.
@@pangzhiyu8098 do u have sources
@@HistoricalWeapons do you mind if they are in Chinese?
@@pangzhiyu8098 i read chinese
语言怎么提升的啊
english
What do you mean, my language skills?
@@HistoricalWeapons怎样提升语言能力，，向你学习哎
why u speak chinese, its language for weak ppl
@@siberiaacoustic lol ur gonna get banned
I would have thought that the repeating bow was much less powerful than than the traditional bow and lacked penetrating power and range.
that too
arrows were hard to make... well instead of training 3 hours a day to learn to shoot 7 arrows at once off a 15 pound bow, they could invest that time in building arrows and still have time left to have a beer with their mates. Just kidding with the 7 arrows off the light bow (good job with that), although that argument still stands... those/cho-ko-nus are all weakish bows compared to real war bows. But a skilled archer will put hours and hours into training, that a SIL archer doesnt need. Same goes for the beer, the king/landlord/whatever... ancient business guy ... will give the peasants/warriors SILs and let them work on the field for the time they save on training archery :P LOL probably true... as TOD said, they werent idiots back then. Or does the army nowadays spend a significant time on shooting lessons... they do train it regularely, but far less than in medieval times, I am sure. Counter argument for the peasant having these is that maybe the weapon would have been seen so powerfull, at least until you loosened all the arrows, that it would have been banned for them.
hi the SIL is just an intro. this video is about historical repeaters. Why SIL not in history is not the question of this vid
the simple reason why specifically SIL did not exist is because nobody invented them
lol
I'm not buyin the 'archers could already shoot that fast' argument. Showing little boys playing with 12lb bows and puny little modern target arrows is silly. Get period accurate equipment including bows that are a typical weight used in battle (not a typical weight you would give a child to practice with) and see how fast you can shoot that one.
heres me speed shooting 125lb th-cam.com/video/Ya6mjSycl0M/w-d-xo.html
The analogy is wrong. This innovation makes any man an "literally an archer". More soldiers with simplistic process is more effective and efficient. The more archers trained the less training are there. The instant legolas solved the problems of the ancient times. You cannot compare it from theirs in the ancient times. Try it brother
the instant legolas does not solve ancient problems. logistics of ammunition and mass production of this modern device is impossible.
and speed shooting is on weaker bows, and not to full draw length. and the chu ko nu is a lot less accurate than other crossbows, as joerg said in a video.
as opposed to the sil, which is full drawlength, can be on heavy bows and still be fast, and i think is more accurate than crossbows.
chu ko nus are clearly faster (and full draw) than speed shooting, and so is the sil.
replaceable by javelins? they are totally different, and require way more skill and are far less accurate.
the original Instant Legolas are made with modern materials such as screws and springs. I know he made one that is more historically feasible but that version is very complicated to make. Also jack's main point here is crucial, that archers back then could shoot similar speeds. keep in mind after the depletion of the magazine your reload is very slow
the sil is not feasible with heavy bows because your powering it with your muscles. look at all the instant Legolas devices with warbows and how slow they are firing after 4 shots
Throwing heavy javelins at close range before a charge did not take that much skill, since your enemy's speed is added on. that's why they were a common ranged weapon before a melee engagement. I compared javelins and throwing axes because they are more effective as a melee weapon. In practice with a SIL you need to drop the weapon right before a melee engagement hence it would most likely break after the battle. the bow has less moving parts hence less likely to break say if someone steps on it.
Change history, maybe not but it should have a spot in history if invented in medieval times. Both east and west had complicated crossbows which were harder to maintain, which means simplicity is only acceptable in peace. Times of war and you face an enemy whose all on horseback and all good archers, then any device that could give an advantage would be tested out. We can only guess what would happen but that's the fun.
Looking forward to channels that would test out all these weapons on different scenarios, against different armor.
@@seanc9520the Chinese repeating crossbows gives us a glimpse how Europeans would of used these things. the problem with having a warbow repeater is that it is just too tiring to shoot for a battle besides facing off a direct charge
This is bullshit. The advantages of the germans repeating bow is ease of use not rate of fire. The reason the gun took off wasn't rate of fire or cheap production (which is also bullshit as it wouldn't cost as much as a bow and would last 5 or 6 bows at least). Believe me if someone had invented that it would have been used.
this is a comparison of historical repeaters, not modern re-inventions.
@@HistoricalWeapons so why did you mention it?
@@garysturgis11 its merely the intro, at the time it was the hot topic online
This verse is about saints
Revelation 14:12
12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.
The instant legolas would've changed history. I'd rather legolas with a war bow than holding the arrows in my hand.
Video is about historical repeaters not the instant Legolas. That is just an intro
Imagine you are a general, equip your archers with this weapon and after a minute hear the message "one of your units has used up all its arrows" but the enemy only lost 10/1000 life
Yes