19th December 2020, 05:37 AM | #31 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NC, U.S.A.
Posts: 2,089
|
Stumbled onto this old thread
Speaking of parabolic blades! I'd forgotten this thread until recently...
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...to_threadtools |
19th December 2020, 04:11 PM | #32 | |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 9,940
|
Quote:
|
|
11th January 2021, 04:25 PM | #33 |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Room 101, Glos. UK
Posts: 4,178
|
Just missed this one at an auction here in the UK a few minutes ago. Went for more than I was willing to pay. Ah, well...maybe next time. Thought it'd fit in here for the record. (I ignore the silly red tassle)
|
11th January 2021, 05:36 PM | #34 | |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 9,940
|
Quote:
Thats the basic M1796 saber blade, but seems to be with an officers hilt. These blades were always in tremendous demand, and even after replaced by the M1821/29 blades, were still in use in India and many other countries including North America. In recent years it has been discovered that these sabers may have even been present in the 'Charge of the Light Brigade' in Oct. 1854. |
|
14th January 2021, 09:32 PM | #35 |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: In the wee woods north of Napanee Ontario
Posts: 391
|
Pipe backed swords can cut a good inch or so before contacting the pipe back. Choice targets would be the neck, head, under the arm, inner thigh etc.
I would believe that an inch deep slash in the neck would be sudfficient to kill. I have an officers 1821p cavalry sword with original sharpening and I would not wish to be cut with it. I think only bone would slow the blade on contacting the pipe back. I don't think you need to cut deeper to disable your opponent. Cutting off an head, arm or torso sounds fantastic but is beyond what is required. I'd like to see period accounts that measure cut depth and who survived and what level of cut and in which locations. There are few accounts of being wounded with a bayonet so many believe there were few bayonet injuries, not the case. Bayonet wounds were mostly fatal and doctors did not waste time observing the dead, only the living. |
15th January 2021, 11:56 AM | #36 |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Room 101, Glos. UK
Posts: 4,178
|
A disabling Wound is far more strategically important. A dead man stops using precious resources. A wounded man keeps using them without depriving the enemy of anything. It ties up about 5 men to look after, move, feed one wounded man, and they need food, equipment and housing as well.
(Historically, a badly wounded man was most likely going to die of complications and/or infection later anyway.) |
16th January 2021, 04:19 AM | #37 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NC, U.S.A.
Posts: 2,089
|
Excellent point, Wayne, and exactly the type of thought process involved with naval fighting/boarding parties. Why kill if you can just take the fight out of them. Just as a surrendered ship was worth more whole than shot to pieces, wounded men can be ransomed or prisoner exchange, might die later of wounds, etc. I'm in the medical field (15 years as a paramedic and 16 as a nurse) and I've seen lots of wounds. Just because a pipeback might only slash an inch or so deep, that is easily enough to lacerate a liver, sever an artery, crack a skull, etc. Just sayin'-
|
17th January 2021, 05:50 PM | #38 | |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Room 101, Glos. UK
Posts: 4,178
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|