heyall i was looking around in my backyard and i saw a piece of street chalk -  the thick stuff bout 2 nhalf in. long - and recently ive been forming clods of dirt into spheres on the sidewall of my house, and so i saw and perceived and behold i said to myself "behold a substance that is easy to form into a glandes and to see if they truly are more effective" and so i shaped that peice of chalk and behold it was so much more effective then my dirt. and also i beheld that i have many peices of chalk and they are cheap and plentiful and great and weighty and wonderful. so naturally i wish to share  these results to any and all that will listen. also does anyone know what the word glandes actually means??? anyway it was so easy to rub that chalk back and forth and turning the chalk as i rubed so as to get rounded smooth ends. and thus it went to far and i was unable to retrieve it and it was lost in bushes of great stature and so is this story complete  :-X
thankyou for reading this message
jack  

Nice story  ;D

The shape really does help over normal (irregular) rocks.  But I can't say that it's any better than spherical projectiles like golf balls.  What do you think?

i know you didnt ask me but golf balls are not very accurate on my opinion,cause i made a sling especially for golf balls.it was kinda disapointing when the select ammunition was not accurate. Brent

My experiments with golf balls have been pretty positive.  What trouble did you experience with them?

Chris

well i dont know they were okay but they just plain arent very good if you live in a city,but they are okay,so never mind ;)Brent

Brent,

What was it that made your sling so peculiar to the golf ball.  Did it have some attributes that, in the design phase, seemed to be better suited to the the smooth surface or the size?

Any old sling should throw a golf ball quite well if released properly.  I have thrown many and they were much more acuurate than I could take advantage of.  The biggest problem I have with the golf ball is its light weight.  Not enough "feel" to the swing, and they tend to release late.

I have been doing some figuring on the weight issue.  My conclusion so far is this:  the projectile MUST have enough weight (and momentum) to force its way out of the pouch.  We all agree that the pouch is best shaped to cup and hold the stone a bit.  This means that the stone will be held by the pouch until is released.  The golf ball has to overcome the inertia of the release cord as it begins to move forward at release.  The ball remains in the pouch until its relationship to the pouch is such that its momentum can push it past the edge of the pouch.  This point comes when the release side of the pouch has opened enough.

We know that very heavy stones tend to release early and very light ones late.  I am guessing here, but it appears that every sling will have its prefered weight based on several things.  They include but are not limited to:

Stiffness of pouch and cords
Depth of pouch "cup" and how tightly it holds the stone
Weight of cord (release cord inertia is affected by this)
Angular velocity of stone at release
Release style
Release angle (maybe)
If your release cord is long and drags your hand

This is kind of like hand loading metallic rifle cartridges.  The projectile is the single biggest factor.  All the others have to be adjusted to the projectile to get the desired results.

Jeff ><> - Who thinks this point should be discussed further

I haven't found a cup to be an advantage over a "flat" pouch.  That is of course unless your firing grape shot. My stretched-octagonal pouches hold golf balls fine. If you think about how the projectile is released (the retention cord flies out horizontal at 90 degrees relative to the other cord), it would be logical that the cup would only be at 45 degrees relative to either cords, which means the projectile does have to force it's way out.  With a flat pouch, it can leave easier.  Can people visualize what I'm saying?  I can draw a picture.

Chris

Let me clarify my statement on the cupping qualities of a pouch.  I prefer a pouch which is literally flat, but which has just a little give to the leather to hold the stone.  When I mentioned that a cupped pouch is universally prefered, I should have been more specific.  I don't mean deeply cupped by any means.  In fact, I have seen some which were so cupped I had a hard time believing that they would throw well at all.   I suppose what I should have said is that we prefer pouches which hold the projectile, and cupping is the easiest way to achieve this.  High friction coefficient between pouch and projectile also work quite well.  The andean style slings use both methods: split pouch for slight cupping action and wool material for friction. (Whipartist wins again with his o-so-beautiful, hand made andean slings!)

The slings I have been making have a natural cupping aspect because the leather pouch is flexible and the strands of cord at their edges is not.  This causes the pouch to cup somewhat by virtue of design, but not much and in varying amounts depending on the stone weight.

I have one sling which is made of stiff leather; no natural cup whatsoever.  I have yet to use it because light projectiles like golf balls tend to perform escape routines as I do my wind-up.  And I only have access to light projectiles (mostly golf balls) for my general slinging.

By the way, Chris,  I have just made a new sling using #72 seine twine.  It is made the same as my others in all respects except that the pouch is slightly altered to accept the larger cord.  The cords are much stiffer and heavier than in my previous slings.   The pouch is supple, yet thick leather. This sling eagerly awaits a test trial to judge the nature of its releasing qualities.  Could I send a pic of this sling to post? (Preferably before I get it dirty.)

Jeff <>< - who wants to get to the bottom of the releasing delima

People are always free to send me pictures whenever they please.

Chris

The Tomek's (guy from Poland) site with a few pictures about making the projectails with the tennis balls by himself. The nteresting idea. He also demonstrate his nice slings.

Tomek and his friends have conreated the special furnave for bakeing the clay glandes and dishes.

"proca" [protsaa] = sling in Polish

http://www.proca.jaremi.net

Jurek

Nice pics.

Is he just injecting the tennis balls with water?

Yes he is, just with water. This is no Molotov coctail or nitroglycerin ;)

Jurek

Quote:

"behold a substance that is easy to form into a glandes and to see if they truly are more effective"

LOL!!!  Jack, I thought I was the only one who thought like that!  I just didn't have the courage to let people in on my secret.  Now I see I'm not alone.  Behold, to boldly make glands the way that no man has made them before!  I'm sure you must be making history man.

I'm very interested in our finding a standard way to make glands.  I agree with Chris about the football shape.  I made glands that way and they fit very securely in any sling cradle or pouch.  But I think ballistically, they are inferior to spheres for long distances.  Short range there is no problem.  

Actually I phrased that wrong.  I'm interested in our finding a standard material and technique for making glands.  The tennis ball way is maybe worth a try, I haven't looked into it.  I prefer an egg shape I think.  

I have three concerns.  Shape, standarized weight, and  durability.  I go with projectiles between 4-5 oz.  

The clay I used is durable enough for the tarps, but it's expensive.  $10 for 25 glands.  And they break on impact with a hard object.

Concrete is hard to manage it seems.  What about mason's mortor?

Clay works for me for now, but I'm always looking for improvements....    


Quote:

(Whipartist wins again with his o-so-beautiful, hand made andean slings!)

 Ah Jeff.  Too kind  ;D

Just wait till you see what I'm cooking up next  ;)  Heh heh.  But my yarn still hasn't come yet!!!!!  Backordered, puh!  I spit on that.  

I love split cradles.  I always loved slings.  But when I learned about split cradle slings!  My heart has been locked to them ever since.

                                           Ben    

Ben, my man, you have plaited one too many cords.  You are getting poetic.

A slightly prolate sphere may be the answer.  It would fit into the pouch nicely but be very close to spherical for aerodynamic efficiency.

jeff <><

Jeff,

Has it really been 3 days since I've been able to post!!  Man.  And I haven't practiced with my sling in 4 days then.  Shame on me.  Well life's a bit less hectic now.  I agree about the "prolate spheres" (good vocabularly there).  My next glands will be of that type just because I like the way it sounds.  

Jeff.  If you haven't done so already, post pictures of your new Shepherd's sling bag!!!

Must now go and kill some wolves after my sheep.  Ben

I will post the bag as soon as Chris gets it.  I have to rely on him to store my images since I don't have a web site.

jeff <><

wrote on Sep 26^th, 2003 at 12:41am:

... also does anyone know what the word glandes actually means???

To answer one of your original questions:

Glandes is Latin and it the plural of glans. This word litterally means acorn although I think it could mean other nuts too.

If you look glans up in an English dictionary you will find it has a more anotomical meaning.

Glans came to mean bullet.

Although we are used to seeing lead bullets in the form of a prolate spheriod from Greek and Roman times, some bullets were much more crudely formed in a thumb mold - made by forming a hole in clay simply by pushing in a thumb. These bullets more closely resemble an acorn.

I suppose it is also possible that it is a reference to the shape of an almond, but I am not sure whether the meaning of glans could extend to that.

nemesis_3003 wrote on Sep 26^th, 2003 at 12:41am:

. also does anyone know what the word glandes actually means???

leaden acorn.  :D

Sounds about right, as a few other languages call acorns "glande" such as french or portugese.

wrote on Sep 27^th, 2007 at 11:30pm:

Sounds about right, as a few other languages call acorns "glande" such as french or portugese.

I'll agree with you on the French point, but my mom who was an exchange student in Brazil for a year says acorn in portugese is bolota (though it took her a while...there aren't all that many acorns in Brazil)

A quick check with an online translator tells me the Latin word for acorn is balanus.

I Liked your theory, though  ;D

Orange Duck

Oh I looked it up on the etymology section in dictionary.com

I seem to recall that most of the "real" sling projectiles recovered by archy-ologists (I can't spell) were spindle shaped.  There must have been a reason for that. Our ancestors were not idiots.  A group of humanoids who can create the ballista, trebuchet, "wild ass" catapult, and Greek fire knew something about something. Maybe a lot about everything.

A recent History Channel episode recorded the discovery of an ancient text apparently written by Archimedes (I think; he was the mathematician in Syracuse) which, when translated, showed that he was working around the edges of calculus.  I don't think that, at that time, "zero" was part of the numbering system, so negative numbers were right out.  Also, why did the Sumerians use a "base 60" numbering system?

There's so much to learn.

"We got a long way to go and a short time to get there...."  From "Smokey and the Bandit."

Trebuchet

OrangeDuck wrote on Sep 28^th, 2007 at 12:26am:

wrote on Sep 27th, 2007 at 11:30pm: Sounds about right, as a few other languages call acorns "glande" such as french or portugese. I'll agree with you on the French point, but my mom who was an exchange student in Brazil for a year says acorn in portugese is bolota (though it took her a while...there aren't all that many acorns in Brazil) A quick check with an online translator tells me the Latin word for acorn is balanus. I Liked your theory, though  ;D Orange Duck

But they got awful [ sic ] lot of coffee in Brazil.  Quoting an old Frank Sinatra song.

Trebuchet

>>>also does anyone know what the word glandes actually means???

Yes.  Glans is Latin for "nut, acorn, or bullet (for a sling)"  Glandis is the correct plural.  So it's safe to say one glans, two or more glandis.  If it matters, it's a feminine noun.   ::)

Yurek wrote on Nov 4^th, 2003 at 3:41pm:

Yes he is, just with water. This is no Molotov coctail or nitroglycerin ;) Jurek

You're missing a great opportunity to experiment with Greek fire.....

Trebuchet