Monstrous 1000lb crossbow, what could go wrong?

Monstrous 1000lb crossbow, what could go wrong?
Spread The Viralist



Jason Kingsley, the Modern Knight, investigates a medieval 1000lbs draw weight siege crossbow and finds out what can go very wrong! #medieval #crossbow #weapon

Join this channel to get access to perks:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMjlDOf0UO9wSijFqPE9wBw/join

source

Recommended For You

About the Author: Modern History TV

31 Comments

  1. A fact not considered in here is height. I assume crossbows are more of a defensive weapon maybe used on sieges. Probably while shooting it from higher ground would cover that range difference.

  2. This video was awesome, but I will say the sound of the crossbow shooting caught me off guard. I expected like a cool fwoosh sound… not a doink 😅. I’ve watched too many movies

  3. Strange. A standard distance in competitive shooting for a regular bow is 50 meters. I've shot up to 100 meters. 109 yards. That is at 40 lbs pull. A 1000 lbs. pull crossbow can't manage that?

  4. I never knew about the windlass before, and a crossbow seemed like such a faff even without one – but i guess it shows JUST how deadly it really was, when successful, that it was still used despite all these drawbacks. Love these videos; brings the people before us back to life ❤️

  5. Well, I didn't major in physics. But I noticed your arc or the trajectory was very steep. If your arc is steep enough you could make the bolt land fifty feet in front of you. I wonder if you flattened your arc that you might actually get a longer distance.

  6. This is fascinating stuff here and I am new to all this but have a question.
    There doesn't seem to be any question of accuracy between this weapon and a long bow so the guy firing the crossbow is not the biggest threat on the battlefield, right?
    Who is? Who does the enemy go after first?
    I am guessing that it would be the guy on the horse or the general or the bowman.

  7. The crossbow was never about accuracy or effectiveness, they were made because they were able to be used by anyone who can look to aim and pull the trigger. Longbows were better but took training and strength.

  8. I do wonder how much the wind seamed to have affected the outcome of the shot length. Based on the flag next to you, it seams the wind was blowing towards and a little bit to your left. And the bolt did land a bit to the left of your target. However I don't know the wind or where you where aiming.

  9. You're shooting into the wind mate. you can see by the flag, breezy day. Besides, the bolt is much lighter than an arrow. It's not designed for distance shooting.

  10. You dummy, your sposed to used wax for the string and rail lube for the rail, in old times they used animal fat and oil from plants and animals, or oil from the ground, it wouldnt of frade if you put wax on the string and fat or greese on the rail

  11. Interesting video. Btw For info – the angle should probably be less than 45 degrees (45 ignores drag caused by air resistance). Wind direction also affects the optimal angle (following wind increases the angle etc).

  12. An uneducated guess to why it's underperforming: your trigger catch is broken in some way, leading to a heavier than normal trigger pull, and fraying on your line (perhaps due to only partial trigger drop, and snagging occurring).

  13. My first and main thought with this is that you would be up on a battlement. However, no one has mentioned multiple people (or crossbows.) I imagine them having a pile of loaded crossbows to fire. Or at very least a rotation of 2 or 3 men. One man does the firing and has a "loaded" bow handed to him after every shot. The other two men load from safety and their timing is slightly staggered. 5-8 seconds to choose target, aim, loose; and 2-4 seconds per crossbow swap would avail both loaders adequate time on their respective "turn"

  14. Typically around 60 paces = 100m, so 120-130 paces is about 200-220m. It depends a little on your height and gait, but in the infantry we spent a day during map-reading to get our pace, and it was pretty close to 60 for almost all of us (55-70) per 100m.

    If you mean 'steps' rather than 'paces' (a pace is two steps, every time your right foot hits the ground), 130steps is only 100 m or so, but 130 paces is probably a little over 200 m more if you have a long stride.

Comments are closed.