[LT] Hundreds of pics of weapons,armors and shields
 

Youll love it...

Unrelated;Question about Windlass crossbows.
LT states that it takes 5 sec to attach them.Can they stay attached or do you have to remove them before shooting?

What kind of armor is that on horse(scale or segmented plate)?
How much more does horse armor that covers 50% of horses legs cost?

Edit: Could someone please post link to LTs "mail and plates" armor pic.

Re: [LT] Hundreds of pics of weapons,armors and shields
 

That's a great link. Thanks.

Re: [LT] Hundreds of pics of weapons,armors and shields
 

Neither. It is mail and plates. Here is a nice example from the British Museum
http://www.flickr.com/photos/45777493@N06/4466741606/

Re: [LT] Hundreds of pics of weapons,armors and shields
 

Thanks you ...(would you be so kind to "chime" on other 2 questions also please)

Re: [LT] Hundreds of pics of weapons,armors and shields
 

I don't actually have historical documents, but I can't imagine that anyone would design a windlass that had to be dismounted before you could actually shoot the crossbow! And if it could stay attached which you shot, surely you wouldn't need to detach it and reattach it to cock the crossbow again. I just took it for granted that that was how it worked.

Bill Stoddard

Re: [LT] Hundreds of pics of weapons,armors and shields
 

Most of paintings show crossbowmen taking off the windlass to shot, if this wasn't needed, they would probably never done it.

I'm just an amateur, but if a player want to make this, I would give him -1 Acc... Or what Dan suggest in the future.

Re: [LT] Hundreds of pics of weapons,armors and shields
 

The illuminations of windlasses that I have seen show two honking large crank handles that would severly impede handling the crossbow. Plus you have to disconnect the hooks that are drawing the string back to the nut. That would just dangle in the way.

Re: [LT] Hundreds of pics of weapons,armors and shields
 

Many military windlasses don't actually need to be attached, since they are built into the crossbow. Those that do need to be attached are generally removed before shooting.

Removing them and untangling them so that they are ready to be used again (as opposed to throwing them down any old how, which makes them unusable for the next shot) can take as long or longer than spanning the prod.

On the other hand, the spanning itself, when done by a trained man, is very fast. As in, you can get it down to a few seconds.

The sources for this are insights from several professional makers of replica crossbows and forum posts by reenactors who build crossbows and windlasses and train to use them in an attempt to reconstruct how medieval and Renaissance people used crossbows. See myarmoury.com, Schola Forum, Fire Stryker Living History Forum and similar.

Re: [LT] Hundreds of pics of weapons,armors and shields
 

Ohh, bless those Chinese Mount & Blade fans. This one goes to my favorites.

Re: [LT] Hundreds of pics of weapons,armors and shields
 

Yeah, some of the 'mysterious weapons of the East' were pretty nifty looking! Rule of Cool indeed!
I liked the pictures of the different armor types. I now have a much better idea of how mail and plates works.

Re: [LT] Hundreds of pics of weapons,armors and shields
 

Icelander - can you post a reference to a pic of that military windlass you posted about?

I would like to see how the handles are taken care of.

Re: [LT] Hundreds of pics of weapons,armors and shields
 

Well, if the handles are directly opposite one another, as in some period illustrations, it would be easy to simply 'park' them in a forward position and shoulder the crossbow.

Even with a more typical and comfortable design, like so, one can imagine that as long as the handle outside the dominant shoulder is the one facing outside and the one closer to the body faces front, it should be possible to hold the crossbow steady.

Compared to a firearm, there is little kick and the use of the shoulder is merely to add extra stability while aiming. Given that heavy crossbows are most comfortably shot while leaning them on a surface of some kind, there is no need for a rifle-style stock held closely against the shoulder. Indeed, many medieval stocks are very un-ergonomic to our eyes, being designed more for their practicality when spanning the bows than when shooting them.

Note odd shooting position.

Re: [LT] Hundreds of pics of weapons,armors and shields
 

I cannot agree that the ironmongery at the rear of the windlass is going to allow aiming. Additionally the hook needs to be removed from the string and if it isn't completely somewhere else it is going to interfere with the gripping of the stock and trigger.

The illustration of the shooter is not odd the bow is canted to show it adequately by the illustrator. Got anything with the bow being fired with the windlass in situ?

Re: [LT] Hundreds of pics of weapons,armors and shields
 

Very true. The hooks need to be removable somehow. Well, at least detachable, but I can't see that it matters if they were locked in an upward facing over the string. The trigger is well behind them and there is plenty of stock to grip.

Can't find anything. I'm looking for a picture of one of these inbuilt windlasses, which authors often mention, but no luck so far. All replicas I've seen use a detachable windlass.

I'd be interested in just how the design varies. Of course, there are one-handled windlasses, which could be more managable.

Re: [LT] Hundreds of pics of weapons,armors and shields
 

My point is that there is too much to grip. Stock plus multiple ropes on both sides of it makes for a pretty big bundle to get a hand around. Avoiding the ropes takes time and risks ensnaring the shooter.

Re: [LT] Hundreds of pics of weapons,armors and shields
 

The ropes don't have to be tight against the stock. It doesn't look like they'd necessarily be in the way of the trigger fingers.

And the other hand is gripping the stock above of where the ropes are anyway.

This is not to say that one shouldn't remove detachable windlasses before shooting a crossbow. Obviously, such windlasses are attached to the string, which makes it impossible to use the weapon with them.

But depending on design, an inbuilt windlass doesn't have to interfere too badly with the operation of the weapon. However, I have not yet seen a good picture of a period windlass of that kind, for all that many authors mention them. I imagine that the design of the handles and placement of the ropes would be different, and, in any event, that such a bow is heavy enough to make carrying it a chore. Inbuilt windlasses are usually mentioned as being part of siege weapons, not field weapons, and in cases where that is not true, the word 'windlass' is being used in a wider sense than GURPS uses it. Screw-and-handle, cranks, etc.

Obviously, modern crossbows often have in-built winding mechanisms, so there are plenty of designs which work. Which one was used in the period I am simply not sure about.

I saw a good description of a Central European Wallarmbrust with an inbuilt Winde, but I can't find it just now. I can't recall if there was a picture next to it.

Perhaps I should try to acquire Egon Harmuth's book, Die Armbrust, for Christmas. It's supposed to have a lot of good descriptions and pictures of otherwise hard-to-find historical examples. And I've neglected my German for nigh-on a decade.