Slinging.org Forum - Questions about clay glandes shapes

Frondeur

Junior Member

Offline

I'm the lead slinger in
a hard rock band

Posts: 90
France

Questions about clay glandes shapes
Sep 13^th, 2018 at 7:35am

Hello every one!

Just some thoughts about glandes shapes,

I believe the most aerodynamic shape should be, in theory, something with a perfectly round front and an infinite pointy tail (think of a plane's wing, just veeee...eeery long). I'm not sure that is a fact, but it doesn't matter now... For realistic reasons, egg-shapes or teardrops should be a good proxy of that, and I'm pretty sure those are known to have pretty good aerodynamic properties.

Now, looking at pictures of ancient sling bullets, I can't help to notice egg-shapes are very scarce, compared to the vast amount of spherical, biconical, or ellipsoid- (football-) shaped glandes. The ancient knew their ballistics far better than I do, so I wondered why they choose less efficient shapes for ammo.

First I thought about fabrication constraints, witch could be the case for the leaden almond-shaped roman glandes ( flatter, so easier to get out of the mold. may count, on an industrial scale; just a guess, I'm no historian nor physicist)

A second factor could be the symmetry of the shape. When placing the glande in the pouch, the slinger has no need to consider its orientation. I never slung in a rather stressful environment like, say, a battlefield, but I reckon I could experiment some shaking-hands issues during the operation...

I should also mention the fact that a pointy shape means a smaller impact zone, and therefore more chance to put the opponent out.

Then back to aerodynamics. Assuming teardrop would be the best, the bullet has still to be thrown with a good pouch alignment in order to produce a good riffle spin.
Now I'm coming to what was the point of this post: pouch alignment can't be perfect, and the glande has, with its own properties, the ability to more or less realign itself. And now I'm getting lost, so what follows is just guesses:
ovoid shapes have been rejected because they don't realign much; the misaligned rounded face offers no significant drag increase until the tail wobbles out too much, and the shot stabilizes itself with it long axle perpendicular to the shooting line. bad.
Biconical ammos tend to be more resilient to bad pouch alignment, considering that the front of the glande offers less drag when facing the target, and that this drag increases when the point goes out of the perfect way. that resilience should also explain the fact that a well-thrown glande always lands point first albeit its trajectory is somewhat parabolic.

Am I right about this? What do I miss? (yeah, I know. The diana. Consistently)
Can I consider the football-shape to be a mix of the two? like, better aerodynamic than biconical, but still a good ability to realign?

furthemore, I don't understand how the proportions of the shape affects the realignment/aerodyanmic ratio. proportions of 2:1 has been good enough for me during my few experiments playing with mud, but i've no more clay around me for now...

If you folks could comment my thoughts, and cruelly point the weakness of my mind, welcome.

Frondeur

- and, once again: wow, what a forum! thanks to the Computer Masters and their numerous followers!

Back to top

IP Logged

JudoP

Funditor

Offline

Rocks away!

Posts: 936
UK

Re: Questions about clay glandes shapes
Reply #1 - Sep 13^th, 2018 at 8:30am

I think that although the teardrop is the optimal shape for travel in one direction, a biconical is optimal for travel backwards or forwards. That might have something to do with it.

I've experimented with teardrop ammo and it's a bit dodgy I would say. Spherical ammo has the advantage that it's fastest to make I would imagine.

Back to top

IP Logged

Mersa

Interfector Viris Spurii

Offline

Druid

Posts: 2597
Australia
Gender: male

Re: Questions about clay glandes shapes
Reply #2 - Sep 13^th, 2018 at 5:23pm

They are bullets made for causing damage , lead is soft so sharp points arnt as punchy. And yes there symmetrical so you can place it in the pouch with less to worry about . That's how I see it . They would not know they are throwing accurately at distance. The glande would be nearly impossible to follow. So areodynamics would be less important. Just want hard hitting consistent ammo . Spheres turn and slip through slit pouches . Football shape solves both those problems

Back to top

Razor glandes, Aim for the eyes!!!

IP Logged

Sarosh

Interfector Viris Spurii

Offline

Posts: 1140

Re: Questions about clay glandes shapes
Reply #3 - Sep 14^th, 2018 at 4:09am

i'm still in the stage of observation and experimentation my conclusions until now are not exactly sure :

(right handed slinger, using mainly stones but also tennis balls and pine cones.)

long tubular stones(i think it's a good approximation to long biconical) if thrown with good spiral they tend to go to the right . i believe it's spin drift. it begins early on the trajectory

round stones with spiral tend to go to the left. i believe it's magnus effect. it begins later in the trajectory

short biconical fall in between(?) it's a grey area

i have the least experience with ovoids. i think pine cones don't spin drift or drift due to magnus but they fly true and stay always on the tangent of it's trajectory.

note: spin drift compensation is huge for artillery but small for firearms.
probably there will be a huge difference between stone and lead.

Back to top

IP Logged

Morphy

Slinging.org Moderator

Offline

Checkmate

Posts: 8102

Re: Questions about clay glandes shapes
Reply #4 - Sep 15^th, 2018 at 1:35pm

I think maybe you answered your own question about why the ancients used less efficient shapes. Aerodynamics were probably lower on the list than we expect when you consider the almond cross-sectioned/ flat/squashed design of some of their ammo. To me this speaks highly for the idea that getting shots off quickly with less concern for the ammo flying out ill-timed being one of their biggest considerations. That or maybe that shape is just much easier to make.

As for realignment I do definitely think some shapes offer an advantage as you mentioned. I also think more thought should be given to perfecting ones release so as to get the best possible spin. Both are really important imo.

Back to top

IP Logged

Kick

Forum Moderation

Offline

Posts: 4451
Finland

Re: Questions about clay glandes shapes
Reply #5 - Sep 15^th, 2018 at 2:11pm

I think sometimes accuracy is over stated with slings used in war. If you have slingers in an army, they would have been used as fast moving units that would run into a position, pepper an opposing unit then get out of there before they could be chased down. You don't need pinpoint accuracy for this, you just need a high rate of fire and ammo that will harass, incapacitate and/or demoralize the enemy.

Fast moving, pointy bits of lead that could embed themselves in flesh and give a good thump to more protected areas? Great.
Fast moving, bits of clay that could shatter on shields and dent skulls? Also good.
Fast moving rocks that could crush bone, armour and required no manufacture or cost at all? Also very good option.

Considering these things, aerodynamics don't really matter. I could throw an odd shaped stone at a group of 100 people and probably hit one of them at 50 meters. It almost certainly won't be the specific one I aimed at but does that matter? It especially doesn't matter if I have even 5 other people also throwing rocks. Those 100 guys we're throwing stuff at are going to have a bad time. Even if we miss, having rocks landing around them is going to be pretty stressful.

Having ammo with a more aerodynamic shape will help accuracy absolutely, but I feel, as others have said, the other factors that would influence sling ammo design, were much more important.

All of this was based on my own slinging experience and reasoning. It was not based on hard archaeological evidence so please everyone feel free to critique.

Back to top

You are a great guy Kick but also slightly scary at times. - Morphy
"Nothing matters, but it’s perhaps more comfortable to keep calm and not interfere with other people." - H.P. Lovecraft, in a letter to Frank Belknap Long, 7 October, 1923

IP Logged

Morphy

Slinging.org Moderator

Offline

Checkmate

Posts: 8102

Re: Questions about clay glandes shapes
Reply #6 - Sep 15^th, 2018 at 2:25pm

I agree KTO. It's one reason I don't put a lot of stock in tales of extreme accuracy during battle. I think those are good for morale and good to scare the enemy but not only are they unlikely from a practical point of view (accuracy so good our best Olympic archers with giant stabilizers and laser straight carbon arrows couldn't do it) but also seems unlikely logistically.

You can have great accuracy with really good ammo or you can *sufficient* accuracy for your needs with ammo thats relatively easy to make and safe to use in a big group under stress. I'm not convinced you can have both. Not from a realistic logistical point of view.

Back to top

IP Logged

Kick

Forum Moderation

Offline

Posts: 4451
Finland

Re: Questions about clay glandes shapes
Reply #7 - Sep 15^th, 2018 at 3:09pm

I think one thing that's skewed views of ancient slingers is the Balearic slingers. They were famed for their slinging, often worked as mercenaries so became very experienced soldiers and, because they were for hire, did some good PR work to ensure their employment. Consequently a view of slingers as being these expert specialized soldiers emerged.

Except, not all slingers in every army were expert Balearic slingers. I'm guessing the vast majority of slingers would have been conscripts and the people in society that would have most experience using a sling (and so get put into the slinging units) would be shepherds and quite possibly a lot of them would be children to our modern eyes even if at the time they would have been thought of as men. They might be really good at slinging in a peaceful meadow to scare away a wolf that is getting a bit too curious about the new-born lambs but they wouldn't be battle-hardened veterans that could hit a single man from across a battlefield with pin-point accuracy whilst people are dying and there's screaming and blood and chaos all around.

Because of this, they would want lots of easy to use ammo that they might well already be familiar with that they can throw consistently even if they're terrified.

Back to top

You are a great guy Kick but also slightly scary at times. - Morphy
"Nothing matters, but it’s perhaps more comfortable to keep calm and not interfere with other people." - H.P. Lovecraft, in a letter to Frank Belknap Long, 7 October, 1923

IP Logged

Frondeur

Junior Member

Offline

I'm the lead slinger in
a hard rock band

Posts: 90
France

Re: Questions about clay glandes shapes
Reply #8 - Sep 17^th, 2018 at 11:39am

Thanks everyone for those insights. this gives me a lot to ponder.

OK, accuracy is maybe overrated. Maybe a bias due to modern views of war, plus the fact that many of us do sling against a target rather than at a crowd. this is how we forget the ancient ways... Grin

That leaves us with the range issue, but I reckon that mass slinging could reduce the need for extra-long range as well, considering the density of the barrage . Still, when I read about training at 180m (vegetius, if I remember well - didn't take the time to check, lazy me.), I know I cant take this number to be realistic, but it exceeds my littles capabilities so much that I tend to blame the rock...

Back to top

IP Logged

Curious Aardvark

Forum Moderation

Offline

Taller than the average
Dwarf

Posts: 13965
Midlands England
Gender: male

Re: Questions about clay glandes shapes
Reply #9 - Sep 17^th, 2018 at 12:16pm

the biggest problem with accuracy at distance is that you can't see the missile impact.
So can't adjust for the next shot.

In the experiments we did at hodd hill - I basically slung at a target and back off till i started missing - and the only reason I was missing was that I could no longer see where the missiles were going.

75 metres in a flat trajetory was my accurate sling range limit. After that I just couldn't see where the missiles were going. No problem with distance I can throw a flat trajectory well over 100 metres.
Just had no idea where things were going.

As far as the teardrop shape goes, I did make a teardrop press mould a few years back. No clue what happened to it.

But it didn't strike me as particularly practical.

Think I wrote a sliding mould teardrop shape at some point as well, and just didn't see a use for it.

It's an aesthetically pleasing shape - just not sure how practical a sling missile it is

Back to top

Do All things with Honour and Generosity: Regret Nothing, Envy None, Apologise Seldom and Bow your head to No One - works for me

IP Logged

Sarosh

Interfector Viris Spurii

Offline

Posts: 1140

Re: Questions about clay glandes shapes
Reply #10 - Sep 18^th, 2018 at 11:21am

Frondeur wrote on Sep 17^th, 2018 at 11:39am:

Still, when I read about training at 180m (vegetius, if I remember well - didn't take the time to check, lazy me.), I know I cant take this number to be realistic, but it exceeds my littles capabilities so much that I tend to blame the rock...

yes that's in de re militari.
a similar topic and what i consider a good answer to 185m target slinging
Quote:

we don't know what good consistency is good to them or the historian ,1/5?,1/10?,1/100????

from
http://slinging.org/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1501704434/0
generals/historians/slingers had their own sense of consistency and accuracy. maybe they were satisfied with 1% hits @185m human size target. I would be. Tongue

Back to top

IP Logged

Kick Forum Moderation Offline Posts: 4451 Finland	Re: Questions about clay glandes shapes Reply #11 - Sep 18^th, 2018 at 11:45am I would be happy with one hit from 185m let alone 1%
Back to top	You are a great guy Kick but also slightly scary at times. - Morphy "Nothing matters, but it’s perhaps more comfortable to keep calm and not interfere with other people." - H.P. Lovecraft, in a letter to Frank Belknap Long, 7 October, 1923 IP Logged

Morphy Slinging.org Moderator Offline Checkmate Posts: 8102	Re: Questions about clay glandes shapes Reply #12 - Sep 18^th, 2018 at 7:13pm Some of us would be happy just to be able to sling 185 meters, let alone actually hit anything.
Back to top	IP Logged

Tint

Interfector Viris Spurii
Past Moderator

Offline

Posts: 2323
Hong Kong
Gender: male

Re: Questions about clay glandes shapes
Reply #13 - Sep 18^th, 2018 at 9:40pm

I think a symmetrical shape would make things easier that it doesn't matter which way to load the ammo on the sling. Less reload effort.

I had a lucky hit once at 250 yards. There was a wooden advertisement board that was about 2m wide and 1m tall on a golf driving range. The sign said 250 yards next to it. I managed to hit it with a golf ball and could only tell I hit it because of the sound of the impact. May be the ball even landed before the hit, I couldn't tell. I slinged at the same target many more times and thought I got close to hitting it again but the sound of the hit never came.

Back to top

IP Logged

Frondeur

Junior Member

Offline

I'm the lead slinger in
a hard rock band

Posts: 90
France

Re: Questions about clay glandes shapes
Reply #14 - Sep 19^th, 2018 at 8:18am

he he... when approximatively quoting vegetius, I wanted to stress the point on distance and aerodynamycs rather than long range accuracy. when getting close to my personal record ( which is no more than 125m...still very happy with it!) I tend tend to go proud when the rock is just flying in the right direction...

Now, going a little off-topic...or not. better open a new one, after all.

Back to top

IP Logged