I concur with everything you said. Apart from being useful as an emergency weapon against intruders there would have been little use for this back then. But times have changed, now we shoot bows for recreational purposes. We now want fun, and that is what I have designed this for. I think the IGK has a much better chance to change archery history in the 21st century than in the 13th century. Oh, and I did a ton of work on repeating crossbows. The „Adder“ that will hit the market this December will be very popular I think.
Herr Sprave, Respectfully, I like a lot of what Nu said, however, a technique used by musket using troops could be modified for use with blokes toting IGK's. That of volley fire ( Loose? ). The musket carrying blokes would stand in ranks, the first rank would fire, then as the first rank reloaded, the second rank would fire, then the third while the first rank finished reloading and the second rank started on reloading. I'm not disagreeing, I'm just offering a thought experiment.
Wayne Scace such a technique was used in the samurai tactics already, kinda. And, although, you are right about the amount of arrows, there is limitation due to human body becoming tired and the power, at which the arrow would be delivered.
@@caninedrill_instructor5861 Arrows would be easily defeated by simple pallisade type shields, unlike musket bullets that will tear a simple cover like that apart.
I initially thought You just wanted to show just another way to make something close to a crossbow, by circumventing the crossbow laws in Europe, as You did many times by making cross slings.
@@jakubpawlowski396 Most anyone involved in shooting sports in europe will have met confusing and selfcontradicting laws, as such i dont personally want to break the laws or even bend them. But sometimes feel like i,have no real alternative to "bending" I am active in trying to make the laws more reasonable (thats not right to carry and castle doctrine in my book) but politics tend to like playing tough on guns rather than smart on guns. IId say the magazine bow is morein the region of good fun when you allready have repeating and selfreloading crossbows. Neither of wich would be legal in Denmark.
Not very useful for Isekai protagonists - they tend to level up very fast, and very soon their natural shooting speed would make the magazine reload time an issue. (unless you use magic to mitigate that - some fantasy systems had the "bag of holding" enchantments applied to similar designs for massive ammo capacity.)
Could be useful in a fantasy setting of you want different but real looking and working equipment. As such it could be useful in both movies and games..
One scenario where such a bow would've been useful would be hunting. You load the bow before you head out, and if you miss one shot you can quickly shoot again.
Especially in modern archery, this would be useful instead of holding super sharp arrows, and risk having one open your hand up, yea you have a thing on the side to hold arrows but taking time to take that out and knock it, the animal could already be gone or see you and run
Even in firearms, there was a time when generals didn't want to issue repeating rifles or magazines to line troops because they felt that soldiers would waste a lot of bullets.
IGK is similar to tube magazine firearms (Lebel 1886, various Winchester rifles, modern pump action shotguns). You have some amount of ammo ready to use and that gives you ability for rapid fire, which might overwhelm (or even break) your enemy. But once you've used this ammo you need more time to reload than someone using "single fire" weapon.
@@marcusc9931 The idea was to use them (Lebel 1886) was single shot rifles. Magazine was to be used only in emergency, when ordered by officers. C&Rsenal channel has very good video about that rifle and others used during First World War.
@@devinm.6149 Shadiversity... It was a huge thing... At one point, Shad hinted to his exclusive fans and they flooded NUSensei's videos with unlikes and racist comments (like real racism, not the ordinary stuff, that Marxist snowflakes are cringy about), which eventually split formerly overlapped audience. The way in which Shad evaluated the outcome on his community pages was also pretty much disgusting...
@@devinm.6149 He created (since deleted) video, I think the name was "NUsensei is IDIOT" or something like this, where he attacked NUSensei for pointing out Shad's terrible myth spreading habits, in this case, regarding archery. In the description he added links to some videos, as he claimed it, beginning with worst one... A few minutes later that videos were flooded and infection slowly infected other videos, which weren't on the list...
After 15 days watching Nu S. I (55) bought a full Archer’s kit (recurve wooden riser), I never had a bow in my hand before..... in this way is how this begins? Is fascinating to me should I be worried 😧?
I think one way it would be useful is what Joerg alluded to in his video, sort of an "emergency bow" that a guard could have by their bed. No need to grab arrows and try to nock quickly while just being awoken by a sudden attack. A couple dozen soldiers running out with 4 quick shots each could make a difference while the camp gathers itself to respond.
That would require the bow to be always strung - possible with modern materials, but a wood or horn bow will quickly lose its shape. You would probably better off relying on rotating guard shifts than guards suddenly waking up battle-ready.
@@chinggis_khagan You could have the string already through it and have it loaded but not strung. Then just grab it attach the string to the second arm and boom ready to go. It is only a few extra seconds.
I love the amount of respect Joerg is getting from the medieval/historical community on yt. His invention is indeed genius and shows how this community is easily one of the most nontoxic on this website.
I've been a fan of @JoergSprave for years & thanks to these reviews of the IGK I'm now a fan of yours! I've always enjoyed seeing his creations (and all of their features "HAHAHA") & your reviews of not just how fun it is to shoot but also the pros and cons of its potential tactical applications are a testament to both his ingenuity & craftsmanship, as well as your knowledge & skills in archery. Thanks for the great content, I'm off to catch up on your other videos that I never knew existed till now lol
Consider that every nation all over the world, invested in developing early firearms, which were initially very slow, unreliable, and inaccurate instead of finding ways to increase the rate of fire of battle proven, reliable and accurate bows :D. Convenience is underestimated historically :P.
with all the attributes Jorge built into the Fenris.. with the trigger handle installed while in a hunting situation where your at full draw waiting for the shot or the animal to relax.. that alone is an invaluable asset in the hunting world.. as is equally fast follow-up shots... god bless Jorge!!!
I can see it as being used along side the crossbow for militia and it might even be used slightly more than some low powered crossbows considering the speed The IGK would ultimately be more useful for field combat but not against heavily armored hostile but against light troops But in sieges crossbow would still be more preferred
Medieval warfare seems to have happened at a 4 ranges: Artillery, Ranged (Bows and Crossbows), Standoff, and Melee. Standoff range refers to the 50-30 meters when an enemy is charging into melee, and whole loads of weapons have been developed to hit the enemy at standoff range e.g. Roman pilae, Frankish throwing axes. Winston Churchill describes in his account of the Afghan wars the British camp being charged at night by Afghan warriors using swords and shields. The British were equipped with the new Lee-Enfield magazine repeating rifles, which improved on the previous Martini-Henry rifle by having a magazine that could be tapped into at standoff range. As the Afghans charged, the British fired single shots as they came in, right up until standoff range. At that point, the troops were ordered "five rounds rapid" and emptied their magazines into the charge at close range, which in pretty much every case stopped the charge cold. I don't know if it would be worth the extra cost, but having the ability to dump 6 arrows per archer into a charging enemy at close range is certainly interesting. Of course, even if this device existed the context to develop the sort of drill I'm describing probably wouldn't have existed.
Some points to address those concerns. The magazine can be made larger with more time and more engineering. Possibly from a capacity of 4 bolts, to maybe 8 or even 10 bolts. Second, would it be possible to make such a device with detachable magazines? You heard me correctly. Create the device so that the fixture that connects with the riser is fixed in place, but that only serves as an attachment point. Behind that would be where the magazine clicks and locks into. That way once each magazine is expended, you can simply unlatch the magazine, and pop on a fresh one. One could probably carry 5 or 6 magazines with 8 bolts each. That would be around 40 shots that can mostly be shot one after another. Also don't forget: Reducing the time it takes to load a new shot means more time available to aim at your target. So that rapid availability doesn't always need to translate into a faster rate of fire, but more time to aim, and less body movements needed for each subsequent shot.
@@akreid4614 Yes, I know and and I am aware that both gentlemen colaborate on a mutual basis snd i a very fruitful manner. I meant "mirror" in the sense of analyze and draw conclusions in context of history. Sorry for causing a misunderstanding due to my poor language skills. My mother toung/dialect is "bavarian". Being a member of this tribe I must admit that we have our problems even with high German, not to talk about English.
I was thinking that too, but if you would make this stock from 2 halves (instead of one piece with a slit in it). and sand them quite smooth and wax it. I think it would last a long time. But that's mostly guess work.
I don't think it will be useful on horseback. BUT, if you're in a watchtower guarding a gate, being able to shoot 4 arrows at a target without moving your bow to load might give an accuracy advantage.
If you are on a wall/tower your arrows would be deadlier to begin with (Since being higher = getting extra speed due to gravity). So I think it would make up for the bow being lighter.
It synergises with horseback quite nicely - the magazine saves you a lot of movement while shooting, while the horse's mobility mitigates the problem of reloading - you can approach, fire a burst of arrows, retreat, reload, repeat.
@@b.m.5068 a crossbow is a single shot and then you need to reload which takes time, this on the other hand you can fire several arrows one after the other and then stop to reload
Completely agree with you and in truth maybe this could have been something maybe for closer quarters combat as then the bow draw weight can be lower. This design is based on many engineering feats in firearms development so in truth as designed this wasn’t in the minds of people back then. But I do love to watch it work and with more updated materials it can be improved immensely. The genius of this is amazing and I do think it’s going to be a hit across the world soon!
I think you are severly underestimating one factor for this. If crossbows had trigger mechanisms which weren't exactly the cheapest, especially in the medieval ages. The fact that this requires a block of wood and an arrow is such a mindboggling economic advantage for whoever uses this. This coupled with the fact that it's easy to use means that it's easier to field a large militia with ranged weapons. The main disadvantage I see is the lack of power on this model, but maybe that could be improved.
The new version does have a trigger mechanism. It makes it more complex to make, but makes aiming a lot easier, since you can relax your arms the moment the bow is ready to fire - no need to keep struggling with the bow string.
I believe the IGK is perhaps the perfect training tool. It promotes full draw fire. It clicks when properly drawn. It is quick and easy to reload. The faster shooting and higher capacity means less time between shots, and more instant gratification. And by the looks of it it is just fun to do, so for anyone looking to start archery but not be slowed down by some of the intricacies of it, the IGK is just the perfect tool to teach people how fun archery CAN be. Whether they want to stop practicing or keep using the IGK or move on to some more technical bows it's up to them.
May have been useful for guards protecting important persons. At close range it seems it would be very effective to take down one or two assailants very fast. I wonder if it was possible for Joerg to create a speed loading system, similar to revolvers. Maybe even revolving arrow magazine; build a mechanism when the string is drawn, arrow is pushed into chamber from revolver, once it's released next arrow rotate into place. Something giving tension to the revolver to make it want to turn. The arrow could be what keeps it from turning, so once fired, it would spin to the next arrow which would stop it. I wonder if a custom arrow with spring loaded fletching would be possible to keep it lower profile too.
THIS VIDEO IS OUTDATED!!! Joerg made a whole new version. Also the advantage with this weapon is that your can field larger numbers if archers and guerilla warfare.
@@succusage3966 twice? It has to be like 4x as strong. Plus imagine how quickly you can recruit a militia to fight with these back in ancient - medieval times, very little need for weapon training.
Several years ago I thought about a fast firing vertical crossbow with a simple wrought iron slider that could allow the bow to be cocked by putting the end of the crossbow on the ground, locking the bow string to the trigger mechanism and then sliding the bow down with your foot to lock, allowing the weight of the archers body to do the work. Somewhat like a Greek gastropedes. Such an approach could allow for quite a heavy bow to be used without tiring out the archer and without a separate cocking mechanism. Then I saw JoergSprave's videos, especially his more advanced sliding "instant Legolas" designs. Perhaps combining the slider with a foot rest to cock the thing might be advantageous. True it wouldn't be as fast firing as Joerg's designs but the magazine would eliminate the time consuming step of setting the arrow on a cocked crossbow. And untrained troops could quickly learn how to use it.
Mass production is taken for granted this day in age. Before the industrial revolution, there were rigorously trained individuals who performed the art of producing the implements of war. Central planning was required in order to produce items of similar size and shape, but the exact reproductions of today weren't quite possible. Mass producing an item with such precision was always difficult and near impossible before the industrial revolution.
True, i thought about that too. It would not be so easy and fast to make a magazine device without modern machines. But it would still be possible back than, you had to learn a lot of people how to make these and even then it wouldn´t be able to produce it in high amounts. Maybe this magazine were given to some kind of elite soldiers and it may not changed history but have an impact on certain situations, of course depending on who and when this were invented first.
One inherent limitation I see from its design is that you can only use arrows with 2 fins on them. The problem with this is that it means the arrows/bolts will have a lack of long range stability, making it only a weapon for close range. I guess that goes in line with your earlier concept of an 'assault bow'. One way I can see how this would be used historically is for horse archers. A very common tactic for horse archers is to run up fairly close to the enemy's formation, shoot in a number of arrows, and run out of range again. I know that Korean Horse archers had specialized arrows for this purpose(대우전), which has a structure of only two fins that are larger than normal, making them easier to load on the string and having an ideal short range ballistic while terrible long range ballistics. If they used this bow for that purpose, they can rapidly shoot in a magazines worth of arrows, retreat back, reload, and then repeat.
You can't keep a traditional bow strung because it would loose strength and break in no more than a few days. So if a burglar broke in, you have to string this up, taking a considerable time. So, this as a home defense weapon is only viable with modern technology. The best bow for home defense back then would probably be a weaker hunting bow. A warrior can shoot quite fast with one, as Lars demonstrated, and a burglar is would not be wearing armor, so a lower poundage bow would suffice.
I’d like to see the magazine on the opposite side, double capacity, and have a slot to move the spring off to one side for a fistful of arrows kinda reload!, spring could be pinned to be able to rotate and still keep tension !?
I think you should consider the skirmish formation which indeed did use burst fire. For example this was the main advantage of horse archers and chariots. Basically the horses or chariots ran in a circular or oval and fired their weapons at the moment they were nearer the enemy and rested/reloaded as their mounts were on the retreating part of their formation, the ranks behind them then taking their shots as they followed..This would give a continuous 4x Even some light foot formations historically used a skirmish formation for missile fire. In any of these cases the repeating bow you designed would hold distinct advantages! Each ranks "volley" being quadrupled! Very useful indeed. The total firepower of a given unit massively increased without adding fatigue
The main advantages I see are that it is that you don't have to spend as much time reacquiring a your target between and that shot placement can be fairly consistent, because you didn't have to move the bow to reload between those shots. The main disadvantages are the obvious reload delay and the shorter ammo tends to have a bit less range from what I've seen of testing.
@@Meop79 "real" ancient archers take months if not years to train while this at much would take days to master, which it's an extremly powerful advantage And imo, this weapon is better than a crossbow
@@carso1500 possibly, yes ancient archers took years to train and this would be easy to learn, this verses a crossbow... hmmm it's an interesting question.
@@akreid4614 there are a lot of videos on UA-cam that show archers shooting accurately and faster than this. You can search too... I have even seen them shoot two targets at the same time with two different arrows...
Meop79 ffs. Watch all of Nu's videos on this topic. And on the topic of lars Anderson. People can shoot fast out of a 40lb bow with a half-draw, yes. But the warbows were at least 100lb. Anybody can shoot pretty fast out of s 18 lb bow easily with a full draw. Pls, research. And all the things that are called "newly found" and "reborn" in Larses video are, well, aren't. People know about them, people practice. Lars isn't a bow jesus. He is talented (and knows how to sell himself), but only that. Now then - where is your proof, that people of old could shoot a warbow (100< lb) fast? And - which is more important - how fast was it?
I think addition of grove at the end of the magazine would definitely increase its usability. Just imagine, you have strong +-100 lbs bow. You draw it, and then insert string into a grove for it to rest. Not only your accuracy increases but you don't use that much strength for aiming. With loading speed. I have to disagree. I tried to make it myself. And using 20lbs bow, normally reloading(with or without magazine) speed with magazine was faster. I think mainly because you don't need to switch your actions(from shooting to reloading and vice-versa). With magazine, you can continue to reload, and after reloading you can only shoot without any switch in your actions. Main issues to my understanding are inability to shoot without drawing a bow to full length(So when using strong bow you loose ability to shoot weaker shots, which given situation sometimes are needed) and second issue is inability to use when you are not using correct form. For example when you are on horse, in a woods crouching. Basically it is clunky. Given that they lacked ability to make magazines, I think they simply couldn't use this kind of tool because they couldn't create it(even Chinese repeating crossbow's magazine was full of limits because it only used gravity, so when you turned it sideways, bolts would fall out)
If you put a groove into it, you won't be able to loose it quickly enough and you also don't want to keep a 100+ lbs bow drawn at that draw for a long time. All that energy rests in the string and the bowstave while its on full draw. If you have any material faults, which could even be increased if the nook you are using isn't perfectly round. A single damaged strand on the string could be enough to have a cascade failure and resulting in the bow basically expending all that energy as the string snaps. Same with the bowstave. Also with all due respect... a 20lbs bow will have a hard time to go through a gambeson or have any real, meaningful, penetration through leather. 20lbs isn't even enough for medium sized game. You need 40lbs at least with that to get any sort of meaningful penetration into the animal. So yeah... 20lbs repeating bows are fun, if you are hunting watermelons and 3D targets. It would be my "go to" choice for a bow to just muck about, but if you want to hunt game.. its at least 40lbs or you are pretty much stuck to hunting small game like rabbits and birds. And for fighting humans, that have armed and armored themselves with even just basic protection.. you need 60+ lbs. You can wound people with less draw weight, but those wounds are unlikely to be deep enough to actually incapacitate the enemy.
@@IshanDeston All your points are right but Joerg made this for "FUN". If I was going against humans with this device the first thing i would change is the ammo. 1/ The arrows/bolts are hollow tubes with a head screwed on. a) Adapt the head so it is a loose fit held in place with some wax.(A "Bodking" would be good). b) place inside the shaft a short iron rod (striker), Fixes in place with a "Small" drop of wax to the rear. c) Drill two small holes in the shaft near the head. 2/ Same as above but your "Striker" is to have a blunt point and attach a (.22) blank to the base of the head before you fit it.. 3/ There are other ideas which use "Hollow" heads and liquids. (And yes I would change the bow)
@@Geordun You are quicker at just taking a metal tube, fitting it tightly into a bigger metal tube at the end. Drill a hole into it, attach the tube on top of the wood, and fill it with some matchstick heads, put in a metal bearing, some cloth to hold it in place.. and light the matchsticks through the hole you drilled. If you gonna change the design, you might as well do it properly ;)
@@IshanDeston Yes but i live in the U.K. and the police would be a wee bit upset if someone made them self a firearm or *ANYTHING* "to be used in Self Defence".(Yes it is illegal to make/purchase items for "*Active*" use in defending oneself) Now if I "just" happen to have a *Fun* Bow and some "Funny" arrows, (but NOT the ones containing blanks) that's a different matter.
Maybe it's like an automatic gear box or a manual? People say you should learn to drive a manual first. Also, how do you know it never existed... It might have, just not in large enough numbers to be recorded. Yes I'm being picky. Subscribed! Thanks Herr Jeorg for showing me an epic channel. Also, we know that Persian and mongol archery would have a far greater rate of fire... Take Lars for example. Definitely need to increase the arrow capacity, I keep saying it, Hilux design like the North Korea's newish Ak magazine.
Someone probably did, but by means of natural selection and actual use most like found it useless. ...and as he pointed Lars uses a very light draw weight bow (40 lbs) for his trick shots. Those things are ineffective in battle where most soldiers are at least wearing tough leather or heavy padded clothes, much less to those wearing metal armor, and remember your shooting hundreds of yards away. The actual Mongols war bow used had 120 - 160 lbs draw, according to historians. It's way much heavier than what competitive/Olympic archers are using. As an archer myself, a well trained archer would probably take a decent amount of time to draw the bow, aim and shoot, relax for few seconds then do the process again. Now imagine trying doing that all day in battle.
The rail in which the string runs is off centre, so as the string is released as it moves to rest position, it must be rubbing the wood of the guide rail. Have you noticed much string degredation at all?
This is a good bridge between a normal bow and a crossbow. It can have the ease of use of a crossbow and the Speed (Even if you don't speed shoot you can shoot four and reload four more and shoot them in less time than many crossbows. Especially the stronger ones.) and accuracy of a bow. Plus it is likely cheaper and easier to make then a crossbow. Also it would be like the repeating crossbow but can have more power (power is set but bow used and archers ability to draw. Meaning you can have an 80 to 120 pound repeating bow). And if you come up with some kind of universal attachment method then it can be used with any bow (of an approximate set draw length). This means if one bow breaks just remove it and attach it to another, personal bows enemy bows you name it it can be attached to and used by your people.
I have an idea for a period correct, technologically speaking, anti-aircraft turret sort of contraption. Use pedal power to spin a flywheel. The flywheel could control rotation, and elevation, as well as have the draw mechanism for a heavy crossbow, or ballista. Use a feeding system similar to the one shown. It could be mounted vertically, since it's a crossbow, and there could potentially be a hopper style loading system. Simply feed arrows or bolts into the hopper, and have a person, or team, keeping the flywheel spinning.
The low draw weight and rapid fire makes it better for close quarters combat like raiding or urban village warfare. Speed is more important in a stand off situation and the low draw weight isn't too bad since distance isn't a big factor.
I like that you mentioned how this could be used by militia and I agree. The ease at which it can apparently be used means that if you strapped that thing onto a bunch of light draw weight bows (50-70 lbs) you could create a decently armed militia force either in a pinch or to supplement a core of professional archers in a real army. An archer's weakest point is up close and personal, hence English longbowmen were issued falchions or other swords. Imagine if for every longbowman there were two or three IGK armed light bowmen to serve as skirmishers, flank guards, and longbowmen protectors. Their usefulness would be relegated to close range fighting, possibly even in urban settings. I know that English law in the Hundred Years' War required all free men of a certain age to own and be proficient with longbows, so this is a moot point, but other countries weren't so adamant; it just needed the right setting to flourish. On top of that, IGKs might be a cheaper, more manageable alternative to crossbows; they don't need to be huge things that require a guy to lay down and use his whole body to cock nor do they need to be made of steel to make shorter, more powerful bows. Crossbows were the weapon of the professional mercenary and soldier/guard; this could make for a peasant's equivalent. Again, it's all about the right setting and circumstances. Oh, and I'm pretty sure that raiders would love this for a lightning attack.
Not sure I only just found this, so I apologize for the late comment. Like all things in combat, the right tool used the right way. I would think the power limitation remains valid with the magazine or not. You can only pull back so many times before your body can't do another. With the magazine, if you need 2-4 quick shots, you in theory would have them. Or you wouldn't have to keep it held on the string the entire time until you're ready to fire (not pulled back, just held in place on the string). Once you are, you just go through the motions of aim, pull, loose. An entire regiment of burst fire could be enough to intimidate a charge, and while they're scattered and trying to figure out what just happened, the trained and practiced archers are reloading, probably quite quickly if they've had any time to practice. The limited training is I think the highlight of this technology. It take A LOT of practice for an archer to achieve "effective", much less "useful" in combat. With this, that training need drops dramatically, which for a low budget/manpower nation could mean more archers that require significantly less training/practice time. You mention the cross bow, but those are notoriously hard to cock. True some could punch through armor (I think), but you're talking about a weapon that takes a special method to cock, which takes time. So back to that low budget/manpower nation, you could have all three. 1) You have your standard archers who have put in the time to be experts. 2) You have archers with this tech who basically have the exact same stopping power in their weapon but without the extensive training. (Alternately, you could have crossbows that are no harder to pull than a bow.) 3) You have the true crossbow that has that extra hard stopping power, but takes longer to cock each shot. The versatility of the bow is a factor that is hard to argue against. I could be wrong, but I understand some archers would use their long bows like a staff if engaged up close. Not every time, and most had an arming sword instead, but the option was there, and wouldn't be with this thing. I think this will pop up in fantasy stories, and I don't think that would be so bad. First it looks cool, which is enough for most. But those who think it all the way through could really build interesting stories, worlds, and tactics around the technology. I know I've got my brain working with where and how it would indeed be useful.
Hello sir, i do not know you nor nothing about bows, im a Joerg Fan :) and i do weapons in joerg style. but i have always been interested in Swords & Bows. so im your new subscriber! what do you think about The use of a sight on top of the wood structure (yes, a bow with a sight, there is not much other chances to do such things) and the use of special bolts like really long ones.
Sights are normal for bows these days, so adding a pin or reference point is not unusual. It wasn't used historically because there were other effective methods of sighting the bow, typically using the arrow as the reference point. Aiming was more instinctive and more versatile for different methods of shooting. Sights only really came about because of target shooting.
There is actually no speed advantage, because the time it takes to reload one arrow into the mag is longer than it takes to load one arrow in normal shooting, so overall you shoot slower than normal shooting. Another big problem is that there is an optimal arrow weight for a given bow strength, so a full sized arrow is actually optimal for most war bows, not short bolts.
I like that design, it sure is inventive. I'd call it "Universal JS-IGK Bow Extension" :D. I can see how this could be potentially impractical though, as with olden days tools it will be harder to craft than a crossbow. Still, I think the best advantage is the improvement in aiming. Also, with four shots in a magazine, it may be easier to maintain stance. However first, one has to come up with the idea and that's a whole different story. It requires a genius to realize the potential of such magazine and then to actually build it. Joerg Sprave, indeed is a genius. A genius who uses rubber, and plywood. :D
JoergSprave if has living in the 13th century i think was like a Leonardo Da Vinci specialist in bow :) And today we has watching a movie "The JoergSprave Code" with Tom Hanks :)))))))
I can see it's use in horseback combat where you're rushing up to the enemy, getting off a few shots, and galloping away. That's one place where rapid fire and not having to manipulate arrows on a bouncing horse may have had a positive effect, possibly.
Castle defense. The ladders hit the walls and enemy begin to climb. Archer can lean out from cover and quickly let loose several arrows, where time is very critical to prevent a breach and also not spending time out of cover nocking arrows keeps him safer. Archer leans back into cover and sets down the bow and grabs a second bow, leans out and shoots some more. First bow is picked up by a squire, servant, or some other untrained person (or a melee fighter waiting for enemy troops to scale the wall) and reloaded , ready for the trained archer to grab. And so the cycle goes.
In my opinion there are few applications where something like Instant Genghis Khan could have seen use historically. Civilian uses such as hunting and self defense do not require high power as your target is unlikely to be wearing armor, whereas speed can be paramount due to the close distances involved in forests and cities. So I believe hunters, bandits, bodyguards and such might have preferred IGK instead of regular bows or crossbows. But yes, it really has no place in the battlefield.
I get that this concept can't really work for a high power bow, but it does work for the power bow you are comfortable with. The advantage I see over a crossbow (even one with a magazine), is that it can be kept loaded and "cocked" much faster... I see it as the bow equivalent of a pump shotgun; yeah, you can empty the magazine if you have to, but you can also top it off after one or two shots, during a pause, and then still have those four shots available if needed. Jorge built this on the Mongolian bow as a concept, a what if, kinda like the posters from some years ago of an American Indian warrior on horseback with a compound bow... Would it have been a gamechanger, we'll never know! Built as an integrated magazine on a more modern bow, even maybe a compound, this seems like a great device for the non-expert archer in a survival scenario, facing multiple attackers who also don't have guns, and not much else... Cause, never bring a bow to a gunfight! Pretty much why bows have been relegated to recreation, while guns are used for defense. I'm no archer, or historian, these are just my thoughts.
Compared to a modern rifle or shotgun, a bow is slower to shoot, much harder to aim, and much less powerful/less range. A .308 or shotgun blast will stop a man dead cold in a single hit. It could take 2 or 3 arrows and a few minutes for a bow to stop a threat. This bow design solves 2 of those issues. It makes it comparable in speed to a bolt action. You could mount a red dot and with a bit of practice be able to aim it as easy as a rifle. However the power and range issue is still a problem. You could use a modern fast acting poison, but that is a war crime I believe. There's nothing you could do about the range save for add more poundage/mechanical advantage. If you could shorten the limbs, perhaps similar to a triangle bow, you could use this 'tactically' similar to a rifle. That is, in a spread out formation, using cover, trenches, ect. Maybe even fire from prone by tilting the bow. But even then that would only "work" in a mad max like survival setting. Where enemies would be few in number and unarmored and under-gunned. In a more realistic situation, you'll be facing a guy with steel body armor and a AR. You'd be hopelessly outmatched. On the medieval battlefield, these would do nothing against armored knights, and a massed charge by them would break through such spread out lines easily, as if they weren't there (assuming no earth works were prepared). At best, weapons like these would be used by skirmishers in forests, at close range, against infantry caught away from cavalry support. They would at least have a role though. Similar to repeating air guns used by the Austrians during the Napoleonic wars.
I'm an archer. I for one find no advantage in having such a device, since unlike the crossbow, you still must learn the skill to draw the arrow, knock it, aim and fire just like any ordinary archer, and training for it is considerable. If you are a trained archer it's much faster in the long run, to just do it the traditional way. Much convenient to in carrying it too. You must understand, unlike bullets today, in the old day arrows are very expensive and hard make. You have the carpenters to make the shafts making them straight and of the same length and size, the fletcher to make and tie the feathers and the smiths to make the arrow heads (good steel is worth like gold at that time). In an army each archers are probably given a limited amount arrows to use and carry. In battle, with such a valuable resource the ordinary archer would probably aim more on accuracy to each single shot and making each shots count, since if the arrows ran out their basically dead.
i think this were to be use during war, it would be more useful in a defence situation, like when a whole line or archers starts launching arrows at incoming enemies. traditionally, say that can launch 6 arrow with in X amount of time, thats grabbing the arrow from quiver, nock it, draw, release, repeat. now they just eliminated time to take arrow out of the quiver, and nocking it, basicly reduced half the procedure, so more arrow can be shoot with in a even shorter period of time frame, multiply that by 100, that is a crazy amount of arrow flying towards enemy, more damage, more coverage. reloading is rather quick too, so with 2 to 3 teams of archers taking turns on shooting, the over all effectiveness compare to traditional ways would be much much greater.
Well this looks like one of the best exemplars of a Sassainian Archery device from the 3rd to 7th centuries - the Panjagan (five device). No one is at all sure quite what or how this worked other than it allowed the mounted archer to fire 5 smaller arrows (small enough to require an arrow guide) eith er all at once OR equally likely very rapidly. This device was an at times key element in Sassinad "shower" shooting - very rapid shooting by stationery or "slowly" moving dense cavalry. The techniques were to disrupt infantry or attack mounted formations making them vulnerable to being shattered by a determined charge.
The answer is simple even if you all don't like it, Because Jorg wasn't back then to invent it then. Sorry but that's the truth. It isn't because people weren't smart enough, they were. It isn't because people didn't have the Crafting skill or techniques to make these, or to make them in mass, They did. This stupid simple answer as stupidly simple as it is like I already said is they just in think of it. Simple.
I don't want to get on my high horse here but when did your comments section stop being archers/beginner archers and people interested in history and start being populated by people who get all of their information from the Robin Hood movie? There are two main issues here making it impractical: firstly arrows were *expensive* which cannot be stressed enough. Therefore they were generally issued by armies (King Henry V had to order the removal of a feather from every goose in England prior to the Agincourt campaign just to get enough arrows to run out 5 minutes into the battle.) So arrows were not rapidly flung downrange as fast as possible, each one needed to count. Secondly, and often overlooked.: Our ancestors were not idiots. They spent their time training for war, refining weapons, armour, tactics etc. Every historical weapon was designed for a role and refined until it worked. As Nusensei mentioned, the Chinese already had a magazine fed crossbow - they could have adapted it to bows but chose not to. People often assume that people from the past were stupid - they had exactly the same brains as modern people but with a lifetime of experience instead of armchair theorising.
People could be stubborn and stupid sometimes, like the guy who said they think matchlock is better than flintlock because the soldier are fine with the former.
It could have been used perfectly by robbers of all sorts. Not to shoot rider, but his mount, or armed, but unarmored civilians. Or it could have been used by specialised units in later times. Just imagine, Napoleonic times. There is some kind of entrenchment with fusilers, defending it. And attacking it, comes unit with repeating bows. Bows have less range, so it recieves incoming fire (bang, bang, bang) => 30% of attackers are killed or wounded. But those 70 % come closer and finish them off. Like easily.
Not to mention english longbowmen also had to bring their own arrows. Agincourt wasn't the only battle on that campaign though. Doubt they each fired 60+ arrows each in under 5 minutes.
Buried with the terra cotta army they found crossbows that were basically normal bows mounted to a stock that looked much like this with a grip and trigger. Adding a IGK style magazine to it would have been easy and pretty neat (mr sprave, if you see this, add a trigger to it!)
@@NUSensei those gravity fed hip fire crossbows? They seem like they would be very hard to aim since it fires as soon as you reach full draw. But adding something like an archer's trigger release just behind the nock point on this would give you all sorts of benefits.
Advantages In a military setting: #1 higher rate of fire #2 dont need to take view off target to knock #3 can be proficiently operated by untrained archers #4 arrows cannot be shot by opponents with normal bow #5 cheaper to manufacture than crossbows
I think I'll only agree on #3 Tbh I love Joerg's instant legolas but I think it's impractical, like it has some disadvantages that made me think it still can't replace bows on medieval times.
yea make it automatic with a lever or air compression but that works more for crossbows i cant really think of a design that works for bows holding vertically that works and wont be clunkly i dont know how u would hold it while turning the lever, a button with a air compression tube sure but lever would be hard to hold in bow aiming position vertically but im sure its possible
And then basically every complaint was addressed by his addition of the pump-action mechanism, as well as the clip he created for the mini version which could be scaled up.
if you really want to get snazzy, you could easily install a pulley+sled system inside the mechism inside the thing... have a sled that grips the string, attached via pulleys to a lever on the bottom, operated by the right hand to quickly pull the string back. Then just install a simple trigger. boom, turn every bow into a automatic crossbow xD
Yes and no, the largest force *should* be when releasing, in which case it is sat in the nock. The slight wear on the draw might damage the string there, but then again it could be mitigated, plus the effects of vibration could wear bows down more than we think. Not significantly is my answer. I don't think it will ruin them before they are too old anyway.
@@mandowarrior123 I was more thinking the rubbing during the draw where the "spring mechanism" is sandwiching the string between the arrow and the wood and the string rubbing there. . . but could go both ways if ya string is waxed good and proper it might just make the wood slick over time instead of wearing the string.? he will just have to thrash it and let us know lol. after all a steady drop of water over a long period of time can bore a hole in a rock so who knows what way it will go.
Interesting thoughts. I think it would've come in handy in certain situations and so they definitely wouldn't have just dismissed the idea of a repeating bow if someone had invented it back then (I don't think that's quite what you're saying anyway though, just that it wouldn't have replaced regular bows and changed the world). Regardless anyway, I think the main reason to invent the repeating bow is just because it was possible.
I'm thinking that if they had 2 of the bows, had a dedicated firer and reloader on the 2nd bow, it might work. It'll be harder to tell if the rapid-fire bow + reloader would be faster than 2 crossbowmen. Maybe 2 crossbowmen and 1 reloader for both?
I'd venture an opinion that a device like this would actually be perfect for an untrained militia because of a combination of factors... while the crossbow was preferred over the bow for its ease of use, it was slow and crossbowmen usually had to retreat between shots to reload lest they be cut down while reloading, while this device allows you to shoot multiple arrows in succession and has a relatively quick reload time compared to crossbows (while speed isn't as important as accuracy, the ability to reload quickly is one advantage the bow has over things like muskets and even crossbows so I feel like its usefulness should not be underestimated either)... yes it has a limited magazine, which is a limitation when compared to standard bow archery, but the crossbow has only one shot per reload and we consider it an effective battlefield weapon, so I'd venture the opinion that this device or others like it, if optimized for war, could be a very good "middle ground" between standard archery (which is a pure display of skill) and high-poundage crossbows (which could be considered expensive overkill in terms of reloading requirements to damage output ratio), giving unskilled militias a rough facsimile of the bow's tactical usage without needing to sink years of training into their archers... basically I could see an army mass producing these and handing them out to their conscript archers for massed battlefield fire, while more experienced troops would use warbows or heavy crossbows for specialist roles like sniping.
From a historical perspective, I think these would have been utilized by commoners and militias who had been conscripted but weren't professional, trained soldiers. Especially from a defense perspective, even a small number of unskilled archers would be devasting firing from atop or inside a castle or fort. I could also see the smaller crossbow style versions being a highly effective sidearm for infantry and cavalry.
No need to fire all the arrow that kick. But you have the possibility, IF needed. The cooking time is also much kicker than a cross bow. 1) training time is critical for an army. With this you can create a thousand off bowmen in a week! And this tool is easier to manufacture than a cross bow. 2) u can use small arrow! So the ennemies canot sand back the arrows, using your munition against you. BUT you always can shoot the ennemies arrow, normal arrow. Just loading one by one in this case. 3) think about cavaleries archers ! They can charge, fire 6 time in the time off two normal shoot and with more facility, so it become easyer to ride your horse and shoot the same time. They will go back and reload after it, before coming again... Devastating ! So this equipment is surely a great thing to have, in my point off view
what about having the spring on an unlockable axle so you can slide a clipped together bundle of X arrows into the magazine stripperclip style. Or maybe have a special bow with a connection to clip the magazine assembly into place for quick release and exchange as a whole.
Don't forget the difference in ammunition. This bow shoots bolts and not arrows. Bolts are cheaper and easier to manufacture than arrows and with wooden vanes you can keep them for a hundred years in a castle storage, while normal arrows may have warped or had their fletching eaten away by mites or mice. :) I think this would've been a good weapon for castle defense. :)
From a Warfare perspective Archers don't do direct fire that often but instead use indirect fire over several hundred meters, usually over their own lines, because you don't get hundreds of men into position before your archers get overrun when the enemy is charging at you. Which means most of the time you gonna lob arrows. And you also don't even need to start with anything below 60 pounds when you fire at armed targets. And how little an 60ish pound bow does to armor can be seen on Trands channel, where he tried them on steelplates, helmets and chainmail. There could be some use in horse archery, but even then a rate of fire of 3 seconds should be more than enough to do passing runs at the enemy line, and you are not going to do that rapid fire on a horse either, with a weapon grade bow. That leaves only hunting and... well except for Emus... animals are not actually known to fight back in force.... also for home defense... i'd use a sword or an axe.. maybe with a shield. You can stand in a doorframe and be relatively safe to be flanked... and if they have archers, just don't go outside. A sword or an axe is so much less maintenance and your assailant doesn't need to do you the curtsey to let you string your bow... and you are surely not going to let your bow rest strung on a wall year around.
You seemed to be able to load it quicker in the second section with the car behind, how quick is it to load and shot just one arrow then repeat as you would with a normal bow ?
I could see it used right before a battle lob a bunch of arrows towards the enemy and then switch it out for a reg one where precision counts just what I think(thought about it some more same theory but have regular archers count to 5 or somthing then they can take care of the reload maybe like a 20 count or somthing and then have the repeaters shoot again and have reg archers hold off a bit and rinse and repeat similar to what something the army would do with the m249 use a 3 round burst and then have a second m249 use a 3 round burst) once again just throwing my 2 cents out is all lol
Oda nobunaga used that kind of strategy to defeat cavalry charge with squads of musketeers (remember how musket can be very tedious to reload). So it's actually a proven ages old strategy. Granted, oda used musket, not bow and arrows. I don't know if arrows shot from this model will be able to stop galloping horse, but I guess it may work to a certain extent.
@@spearsage like I said it's just what I think I'm just talking about the rapid fire concept I doubt this bow would have the power to lob the bolts that far but I'm sure people back the where more stronger and used to using have draws that it tech could be a viable option with a stronger draw bow so who really knows but somthing worth considering
@@prpunk187 Agree. Nu sensei also showed that there is a fast way to reload the bow (which is quite easy as well). And should the contraption break or malfunctioned, the user could just strip it away and use the bow normally. The only problem here probably there was no Jeorg Sprave to design this in the past 😉
@JThorsson Bael Invictus It just wasn't worth the trouble, rate of fire isn't as important as saving money in combat. Yeah you get kick ass bows, but you double the cost of the bow, more than triple the ammo needed (archers usually shot until they ran out of arrows anyway) and made another part on the bow that could break, it's easier and cheaper just to draft a few more guys and give them crossbows
Infinite power and godly accurate. Japan is the best case study, best bows & archers in world, first to transition to matchlocks. Why? Matchlocks require MORE training and cost, no shortage of skilled archers. Because when you get shot with a thick ass musket ball, you know about it. Nothing like tiny bullets. And armour would stop it, but that armour is heavy, and not cheap. They have stopping power on their side. Japanese used guns so big they couldn't stand up and firing them without falling over (or they fell to absorb recoil, its a whole martial art anyway. Or was.) skilled people can dodge/deflect (lethal)arrows, guns can be aimed for as long as you like, almost. Guns can be fired prone in ambush, massed fire can be used easily, they scare horses, and they penetrate at much longer ranges than most archery (japanese archery in war was done at excessive ranges up to 400m, in excess of guns, however it is stated don't bother shooting at more than 20m if you want to hit/hurt anything in war.(criticism samurai were training at too long ranges) the strongest tactic pre-gun in japan was shock cavalry. On the battlefield in heavy rain (considered by most at the time the worst weather for matchlocks) were tried by shock cavalry and they were massacred. Horses die far quicker with ball cavitation, wounds were catastrophic (you either stop with armour or do not stop, no real mitigation of damage like with arrows) and they plain got more shots in. They used extra men to help reload iirc, but the extra (effective) range is what did it. Also bullets break bones, which is substantially more debilitating than piercing bones, though i have no doubt arrows sometimes did that too.
cause they were easier than teaching how to use bows thats why we use guns nowadays, that was just the beginning of guns and Technology about guns that's why no one uses muskets anymore
@J Thorsson How would you lug this thing around and keep it protected from the weather? Both traditional bows and muskets are relatively easy to store and lug of around. Most of battlefield combat through most of history was walking or taking a boat to enemy territory through various weather conditions.
There was a similar device used against Rome i.e. The Belly Bow which later became the Crossbow. Also you are assuming that person using this device will be *standing*. But in history sometimes the Crossbow/heavy bow was used from the sitting position (I think it was the Han). With a heavier bow ,sitting this would be ideal for ambushing! With this device you end up with something between a Bow and the Crossbow, A Jack of all trades.
What about close combat? You can field large numbers of soldiers armed with automatic crossbows as an engagement weapon much like how the Romans equipped their infantry with Pila's. The Pila was used before formations closed in for melee. The Pila thrown would impale shields making them useless or right out injure or kill enemies. What if infantry was equipped with these bows that they used before they go to their sword or spears? Combine the automatic bows with stripper clips for bolts and you got a rapid fire close range weapon. How much damage would a soldier be able to inflict before he's forced to use his melee weapon? For home defense yes that's a deadly weapon vs anything other then a real gun.
I wonder if you'd get serious problems with the bow, at military draw weights. It is hard on arrows in general, when they are shot from a powerful bow. If they rubbed against a magazine as they were loosed, they might splinter to pieces.
I think you are overlooking a huge advantage this has and that it shoots bolts that cant is shot back, compare the firing speed vs a Mongolian arrow guide. Two ideas I had were 1, square bolts with small holes drilled and 'pinned' together in the front and back with small breakable dowl to make a stripper clip. The second would be to build a frame that holds the regular bolts and 'glue' them together with wax and a dowl to keep the wax a bit stiffer and keep them straight.
Sometimes its culture that make it hard for new weapon to be adapted. People will try to find excuses why a new expensive tools is not worthy replacement for crossbow or bow.. For me, this kind of weapon is simply perfect for defending a castle or a wall. The line of fire for those on the wall is just one line, while hordes of enemy is trying to scale it. It was fast, accurate, reducing eror cause by stress, and it still had enough firepower to deal damages to light armored oponent
How about volley fire? Basically suppressing fire where a massed rank fires 4 arrows each in quick succession And then the other one fires. From what I understand bows where mostly a psychological weapon when fighting armoured European troops. And from what I understand its power and accuracy is actually not to shabby. And early gunpowder weapons had alot of weaknesses as well and people still kept using that.
I would like to have several objections on Instant Genghis Khan impracticality. The videos title, and the main content focuses on the repeating feature of the device, and seems to believe that's the only thing it offers. That's not true. There are multiple other advantages it comes with, especially the 8th generation following this video: 1. The device provides a stable platform for sights to be mounted on, even a traditional iron sight will be much better than aiming with naked eye. 2. It increases people's firing speed under stressful condition. The several videos you provide are people shooting in a peaceful place, not on a battlefield. Studies have shown stress and fear of enemies can drastically increase human error. The device ensure the string always extend at the same direction with no shaking; you remain stable on horseback; and you don't spend time grabbing your quiver and risk pouring them out due to panic. 3. Without needing to spend extra training time on remaining calm, more potential archers can be recruited. Similar to crossbowmen. 4. In fact, since the 8th gen effectively turns it into a crossbow, you do not need to manufacture crossbows independently, a country only needs to mass produce one type of bow; the less trained is equipped with this device, while those need to be stealthy or compact doesn't have one. This thing can even mount on a platform and with extra magazine, turns into a machine gun. Perhaps this thing was not invented, was because no countries had the manufacturing capability; the wooden body makes preservation hard to find, or that by the time human were capable to, firearms are matured enough and widely spread.
I disagree. While you do list several other advantages, they are essentially those of the crossbow, which we already had in history. The distinguishing and *relevant* feature of this device is indeed the repeating feature, which is appropriate as the main focus.
In warfare 13th century or so flexibility would matter knowing you can draw an arrow anytime you need to with the igk you need to keep count of your bolts so you can back down for reload.
I concur with everything you said. Apart from being useful as an emergency weapon against intruders there would have been little use for this back then. But times have changed, now we shoot bows for recreational purposes. We now want fun, and that is what I have designed this for. I think the IGK has a much better chance to change archery history in the 21st century than in the 13th century.
Oh, and I did a ton of work on repeating crossbows. The „Adder“ that will hit the market this December will be very popular I think.
Herr Sprave,
Respectfully,
I like a lot of what Nu said, however, a technique used by musket using troops could be modified for use with blokes toting IGK's. That of volley fire ( Loose? ). The musket carrying blokes would stand in ranks, the first rank would fire, then as the first rank reloaded, the second rank would fire, then the third while the first rank finished reloading and the second rank started on reloading.
I'm not disagreeing, I'm just offering a thought experiment.
Wayne Scace such a technique was used in the samurai tactics already, kinda. And, although, you are right about the amount of arrows, there is limitation due to human body becoming tired and the power, at which the arrow would be delivered.
@@caninedrill_instructor5861 Arrows would be easily defeated by simple pallisade type shields, unlike musket bullets that will tear a simple cover like that apart.
I initially thought You just wanted to show just another way to make something close to a crossbow, by circumventing the crossbow laws in Europe, as You did many times by making cross slings.
@@jakubpawlowski396 Most anyone involved in shooting sports in europe will have met confusing and selfcontradicting laws, as such i dont personally want to break the laws or even bend them. But sometimes feel like i,have no real alternative to "bending"
I am active in trying to make the laws more reasonable (thats not right to carry and castle doctrine in my book) but politics tend to like playing tough on guns rather than smart on guns.
IId say the magazine bow is morein the region of good fun when you allready have repeating and selfreloading crossbows.
Neither of wich would be legal in Denmark.
Possible markets:
- Spec-ops agents
- Civilians and hunters
- Isekai protagonists
Joshua Madoc stranded in fantasy reference?
@@spacebear4742 Never heard that before. I'm much more exposed to the isekai manga genre than 1d4chan in general.
+1 for isekai protagonists :DD
Not very useful for Isekai protagonists - they tend to level up very fast, and very soon their natural shooting speed would make the magazine reload time an issue. (unless you use magic to mitigate that - some fantasy systems had the "bag of holding" enchantments applied to similar designs for massive ammo capacity.)
Could be useful in a fantasy setting of you want different but real looking and working equipment. As such it could be useful in both movies and games..
the theory is that joerg is an avatar of a ancient war god that come on earth to amaze us with his divine warfare
And to show you their features!
If you imagine a war god with his physical strength then yea it still matches .
@Vanillaman you forgot Hephaestus in that equation
One scenario where such a bow would've been useful would be hunting. You load the bow before you head out, and if you miss one shot you can quickly shoot again.
Especially in modern archery, this would be useful instead of holding super sharp arrows, and risk having one open your hand up, yea you have a thing on the side to hold arrows but taking time to take that out and knock it, the animal could already be gone or see you and run
A white-tailed deer can run 10 feet *during arrow* flight at 20 yards. If you miss the first shot you have lost the animal - there is no second shot.
If you hit the deer, especially with bow under 55 pounds it can take more than 1 arrow to kill it, I'm not cutting it's neck if it has a big rack
@@clear_image_photos5477 Then why use a bow under 55 pounds?
I was just giving an example, any weight you have to wait and let the deer, bear elk ECT bleed out, lower weights just take longer
Even in firearms, there was a time when generals didn't want to issue repeating rifles or magazines to line troops because they felt that soldiers would waste a lot of bullets.
IGK is similar to tube magazine firearms (Lebel 1886, various Winchester rifles, modern pump action shotguns). You have some amount of ammo ready to use and that gives you ability for rapid fire, which might overwhelm (or even break) your enemy. But once you've used this ammo you need more time to reload than someone using "single fire" weapon.
And their soldiers got slaughtered when the enemy thought differently.
@@PobortzaPl There has been formation tactics for centuries for dealing with reload time issues.
@@marcusc9931 The idea was to use them (Lebel 1886) was single shot rifles. Magazine was to be used only in emergency, when ordered by officers.
C&Rsenal channel has very good video about that rifle and others used during First World War.
The friggin' high command of the North in the Civil War had the "wastes ammo" concern and had to be overruled by *Lincoln himself*
You have a point, but counterpoint: Moar Dakka!
WAAAAAAAGH!!!!
Dem oomies wont be expectin' dis bolt shoota!
Sum Gud Bitz un dat panzy hummie shoota.
Neads moar Dakka!!!
Jus' got ta snag uh grot to put moar pointie sticks in.
@@codysing1223 DAKKA DAKKA DAKKA!!!
Fast dakka best dakka
the two era of this chanel :
The Pre-Jörg era
The Post-Jörg era
Pre-Shad? Post-Shad?
@@kaisersnow2618 Shadiversity, or a different Shad?
@@devinm.6149 Shadiversity... It was a huge thing...
At one point, Shad hinted to his exclusive fans and they flooded NUSensei's videos with unlikes and racist comments (like real racism, not the ordinary stuff, that Marxist snowflakes are cringy about), which eventually split formerly overlapped audience.
The way in which Shad evaluated the outcome on his community pages was also pretty much disgusting...
@@FalkonNightsdale what did he hint?
@@devinm.6149 He created (since deleted) video, I think the name was "NUsensei is IDIOT" or something like this, where he attacked NUSensei for pointing out Shad's terrible myth spreading habits, in this case, regarding archery.
In the description he added links to some videos, as he claimed it, beginning with worst one...
A few minutes later that videos were flooded and infection slowly infected other videos, which weren't on the list...
This is created by JoergSprave only with one purpose: FUN. HAHAHA.
THANKS AND BYE BYE
I think you're addicted to this.
And so am I.
Well, you are not alone. Me too!
@ that's tragic
After 15 days watching Nu S. I (55) bought a full Archer’s kit (recurve wooden riser), I never had a bow in my hand before..... in this way is how this begins?
Is fascinating to me should I be worried 😧?
@@Xupertes wait til you get a compound;)
@@bumstudios8817 i saw my Archery Senior's compound bow.. man, it is mind blowing! I love it!
Sensei can't get enough of this, and why not. I mean having this creative masterpiece really feels wonderful. Joergsprave is a creative genius man.
I think one way it would be useful is what Joerg alluded to in his video, sort of an "emergency bow" that a guard could have by their bed. No need to grab arrows and try to nock quickly while just being awoken by a sudden attack. A couple dozen soldiers running out with 4 quick shots each could make a difference while the camp gathers itself to respond.
This seems perfect for garrison duty.
That would require the bow to be always strung - possible with modern materials, but a wood or horn bow will quickly lose its shape. You would probably better off relying on rotating guard shifts than guards suddenly waking up battle-ready.
@@chinggis_khagan You could have the string already through it and have it loaded but not strung. Then just grab it attach the string to the second arm and boom ready to go. It is only a few extra seconds.
@@Duke00x Have you ever strung a high poundage bow?
I love the amount of respect Joerg is getting from the medieval/historical community on yt. His invention is indeed genius and shows how this community is easily one of the most nontoxic on this website.
I've been a fan of @JoergSprave for years & thanks to these reviews of the IGK I'm now a fan of yours! I've always enjoyed seeing his creations (and all of their features "HAHAHA") & your reviews of not just how fun it is to shoot but also the pros and cons of its potential tactical applications are a testament to both his ingenuity & craftsmanship, as well as your knowledge & skills in archery. Thanks for the great content, I'm off to catch up on your other videos that I never knew existed till now lol
Consider that every nation all over the world, invested in developing early firearms, which were initially very slow, unreliable, and inaccurate instead of finding ways to increase the rate of fire of battle proven, reliable and accurate bows :D.
Convenience is underestimated historically :P.
Dude what
with all the attributes Jorge built into the Fenris.. with the trigger handle installed while in a hunting situation where your at full draw waiting for the shot or the animal to relax.. that alone is an invaluable asset in the hunting world.. as is equally fast follow-up shots... god bless Jorge!!!
This was a great collaborative series. :) Love both of you, and I really hope that Joerg's and NUsensei's channels both grew a lot from this.
I can see it as being used along side the crossbow for militia and it might even be used slightly more than some low powered crossbows considering the speed
The IGK would ultimately be more useful for field combat but not against heavily armored hostile but against light troops
But in sieges crossbow would still be more preferred
Medieval warfare seems to have happened at a 4 ranges: Artillery, Ranged (Bows and Crossbows), Standoff, and Melee. Standoff range refers to the 50-30 meters when an enemy is charging into melee, and whole loads of weapons have been developed to hit the enemy at standoff range e.g. Roman pilae, Frankish throwing axes.
Winston Churchill describes in his account of the Afghan wars the British camp being charged at night by Afghan warriors using swords and shields. The British were equipped with the new Lee-Enfield magazine repeating rifles, which improved on the previous Martini-Henry rifle by having a magazine that could be tapped into at standoff range. As the Afghans charged, the British fired single shots as they came in, right up until standoff range. At that point, the troops were ordered "five rounds rapid" and emptied their magazines into the charge at close range, which in pretty much every case stopped the charge cold.
I don't know if it would be worth the extra cost, but having the ability to dump 6 arrows per archer into a charging enemy at close range is certainly interesting. Of course, even if this device existed the context to develop the sort of drill I'm describing probably wouldn't have existed.
Some points to address those concerns. The magazine can be made larger with more time and more engineering. Possibly from a capacity of 4 bolts, to maybe 8 or even 10 bolts. Second, would it be possible to make such a device with detachable magazines? You heard me correctly. Create the device so that the fixture that connects with the riser is fixed in place, but that only serves as an attachment point. Behind that would be where the magazine clicks and locks into. That way once each magazine is expended, you can simply unlatch the magazine, and pop on a fresh one. One could probably carry 5 or 6 magazines with 8 bolts each. That would be around 40 shots that can mostly be shot one after another. Also don't forget: Reducing the time it takes to load a new shot means more time available to aim at your target. So that rapid availability doesn't always need to translate into a faster rate of fire, but more time to aim, and less body movements needed for each subsequent shot.
ohhh man imagine if you could get to try more of Herr Sprave's creations!
Greetings from Germany. Interesting how you comment and mirror Joerg Spraves invention. Well done, good job!
Hans Müller he isn't mirroring. Joerg send this to him)
@@akreid4614 Yes, I know and and I am aware that both gentlemen colaborate on a mutual basis snd i a very fruitful manner. I meant "mirror" in the sense of analyze and draw conclusions in context of history.
Sorry for causing a misunderstanding due to my poor language skills. My mother toung/dialect is "bavarian". Being a member of this tribe I must admit that we have our problems even with high German, not to talk about English.
I have to wonder how an historic bowstring would hold up to sliding through that wooden slot.
I was thinking that too, but if you would make this stock from 2 halves (instead of one piece with a slit in it). and sand them quite smooth and wax it. I think it would last a long time. But that's mostly guess work.
He can't stop shooting it 🤣🤣🤣nice job Jorge 👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾😁
I doubt I could either
@@WhoThisMonkey i will got the addiction too..
UA-cam is boosting Joergs video for obvious reasons >:)
@Deimos Cain do you not know of what Joerg is doing to UA-cam? He's planning to sue them if they do not listen to his demands.
Im a proud subscriber of JoergSprave
I don't think it will be useful on horseback. BUT, if you're in a watchtower guarding a gate, being able to shoot 4 arrows at a target without moving your bow to load might give an accuracy advantage.
If you are on a wall/tower your arrows would be deadlier to begin with (Since being higher = getting extra speed due to gravity). So I think it would make up for the bow being lighter.
It synergises with horseback quite nicely - the magazine saves you a lot of movement while shooting, while the horse's mobility mitigates the problem of reloading - you can approach, fire a burst of arrows, retreat, reload, repeat.
That's why they had crossbows
@@b.m.5068 a crossbow is a single shot and then you need to reload which takes time, this on the other hand you can fire several arrows one after the other and then stop to reload
so when ever you wanted to charge enough energy, that will be super tiring and slow?
i guess that's why we invented gun......
the first guns were super slow and used more for psychological effect. Then we got them refined and the world changed.
Awesome weapon mate 😁.love how your doing more trad stuff 👍
Completely agree with you and in truth maybe this could have been something maybe for closer quarters combat as then the bow draw weight can be lower. This design is based on many engineering feats in firearms development so in truth as designed this wasn’t in the minds of people back then. But I do love to watch it work and with more updated materials it can be improved immensely. The genius of this is amazing and I do think it’s going to be a hit across the world soon!
Very good NuSensei
I think you are severly underestimating one factor for this. If crossbows had trigger mechanisms which weren't exactly the cheapest, especially in the medieval ages. The fact that this requires a block of wood and an arrow is such a mindboggling economic advantage for whoever uses this. This coupled with the fact that it's easy to use means that it's easier to field a large militia with ranged weapons.
The main disadvantage I see is the lack of power on this model, but maybe that could be improved.
The new version does have a trigger mechanism. It makes it more complex to make, but makes aiming a lot easier, since you can relax your arms the moment the bow is ready to fire - no need to keep struggling with the bow string.
I believe the IGK is perhaps the perfect training tool. It promotes full draw fire. It clicks when properly drawn. It is quick and easy to reload. The faster shooting and higher capacity means less time between shots, and more instant gratification. And by the looks of it it is just fun to do, so for anyone looking to start archery but not be slowed down by some of the intricacies of it, the IGK is just the perfect tool to teach people how fun archery CAN be. Whether they want to stop practicing or keep using the IGK or move on to some more technical bows it's up to them.
I learned a lot watching your videos. Big fan.
His six shot long bow version of this is absolutely lethal and accurate.
May have been useful for guards protecting important persons. At close range it seems it would be very effective to take down one or two assailants very fast. I wonder if it was possible for Joerg to create a speed loading system, similar to revolvers. Maybe even revolving arrow magazine; build a mechanism when the string is drawn, arrow is pushed into chamber from revolver, once it's released next arrow rotate into place. Something giving tension to the revolver to make it want to turn. The arrow could be what keeps it from turning, so once fired, it would spin to the next arrow which would stop it. I wonder if a custom arrow with spring loaded fletching would be possible to keep it lower profile too.
Joerg gave you your new favorite toy, didn’t he? :)
THIS VIDEO IS OUTDATED!!!
Joerg made a whole new version. Also the advantage with this weapon is that your can field larger numbers if archers and guerilla warfare.
And it's like twice as.strong and even faster
@@succusage3966 twice? It has to be like 4x as strong.
Plus imagine how quickly you can recruit a militia to fight with these back in ancient - medieval times, very little need for weapon training.
I think he knew it already and the new magazines are in a other leaque
Several years ago I thought about a fast firing vertical crossbow with a simple wrought iron slider that could allow the bow to be cocked by putting the end of the crossbow on the ground, locking the bow string to the trigger mechanism and then sliding the bow down with your foot to lock, allowing the weight of the archers body to do the work. Somewhat like a Greek gastropedes. Such an approach could allow for quite a heavy bow to be used without tiring out the archer and without a separate cocking mechanism. Then I saw JoergSprave's videos, especially his more advanced sliding "instant Legolas" designs. Perhaps combining the slider with a foot rest to cock the thing might be advantageous. True it wouldn't be as fast firing as Joerg's designs but the magazine would eliminate the time consuming step of setting the arrow on a cocked crossbow. And untrained troops could quickly learn how to use it.
Mass production is taken for granted this day in age. Before the industrial revolution, there were rigorously trained individuals who performed the art of producing the implements of war. Central planning was required in order to produce items of similar size and shape, but the exact reproductions of today weren't quite possible. Mass producing an item with such precision was always difficult and near impossible before the industrial revolution.
True, i thought about that too. It would not be so easy and fast to make a magazine device without modern machines. But it would still be possible back than, you had to learn a lot of people how to make these and even then it wouldn´t be able to produce it in high amounts. Maybe this magazine were given to some kind of elite soldiers and it may not changed history but have an impact on certain situations, of course depending on who and when this were invented first.
One inherent limitation I see from its design is that you can only use arrows with 2 fins on them. The problem with this is that it means the arrows/bolts will have a lack of long range stability, making it only a weapon for close range. I guess that goes in line with your earlier concept of an 'assault bow'. One way I can see how this would be used historically is for horse archers. A very common tactic for horse archers is to run up fairly close to the enemy's formation, shoot in a number of arrows, and run out of range again. I know that Korean Horse archers had specialized arrows for this purpose(대우전), which has a structure of only two fins that are larger than normal, making them easier to load on the string and having an ideal short range ballistic while terrible long range ballistics. If they used this bow for that purpose, they can rapidly shoot in a magazines worth of arrows, retreat back, reload, and then repeat.
Jeorge made one with the two twisted fins, it twisted in flight giving greater stability, much like rifling in a gun barrel
You can't keep a traditional bow strung because it would loose strength and break in no more than a few days. So if a burglar broke in, you have to string this up, taking a considerable time. So, this as a home defense weapon is only viable with modern technology. The best bow for home defense back then would probably be a weaker hunting bow. A warrior can shoot quite fast with one, as Lars demonstrated, and a burglar is would not be wearing armor, so a lower poundage bow would suffice.
I’d like to see the magazine on the opposite side, double capacity, and have a slot to move the spring off to one side for a fistful of arrows kinda reload!, spring could be pinned to be able to rotate and still keep tension !?
I think you should consider the skirmish formation which indeed did use burst fire. For example this was the main advantage of horse archers and chariots. Basically the horses or chariots ran in a circular or oval and fired their weapons at the moment they were nearer the enemy and rested/reloaded as their mounts were on the retreating part of their formation, the ranks behind them then taking their shots as they followed..This would give a continuous 4x Even some light foot formations historically used a skirmish formation for missile fire. In any of these cases the repeating bow you designed would hold distinct advantages! Each ranks "volley" being quadrupled! Very useful indeed. The total firepower of a given unit massively increased without adding fatigue
The main advantages I see are that it is that you don't have to spend as much time reacquiring a your target between and that shot placement can be fairly consistent, because you didn't have to move the bow to reload between those shots.
The main disadvantages are the obvious reload delay and the shorter ammo tends to have a bit less range from what I've seen of testing.
I mean, who doesn't love this bow?
Real ancient archers could fire this rapidly and reload faster than this. This would have been a rich man's toy...
@@Meop79 but did u see the bow? Isn't it heavy?
@@Meop79 "real" ancient archers take months if not years to train while this at much would take days to master, which it's an extremly powerful advantage
And imo, this weapon is better than a crossbow
@@carso1500 possibly, yes ancient archers took years to train and this would be easy to learn, this verses a crossbow... hmmm it's an interesting question.
I think this would be great for a Wall/Tower defense during a siege of a stronghold or castle.
Real ancient archers were much faster than this bow, that's why...
Meop79 proof?
@@akreid4614 there are a lot of videos on UA-cam that show archers shooting accurately and faster than this. You can search too... I have even seen them shoot two targets at the same time with two different arrows...
@@akreid4614 ua-cam.com/video/BEG-ly9tQGk/v-deo.html
Meop79 ffs. Watch all of Nu's videos on this topic. And on the topic of lars Anderson. People can shoot fast out of a 40lb bow with a half-draw, yes. But the warbows were at least 100lb. Anybody can shoot pretty fast out of s 18 lb bow easily with a full draw. Pls, research. And all the things that are called "newly found" and "reborn" in Larses video are, well, aren't. People know about them, people practice. Lars isn't a bow jesus. He is talented (and knows how to sell himself), but only that.
Now then - where is your proof, that people of old could shoot a warbow (100< lb) fast? And - which is more important - how fast was it?
I think addition of grove at the end of the magazine would definitely increase its usability. Just imagine, you have strong +-100 lbs bow. You draw it, and then insert string into a grove for it to rest. Not only your accuracy increases but you don't use that much strength for aiming.
With loading speed. I have to disagree. I tried to make it myself. And using 20lbs bow, normally reloading(with or without magazine) speed with magazine was faster. I think mainly because you don't need to switch your actions(from shooting to reloading and vice-versa). With magazine, you can continue to reload, and after reloading you can only shoot without any switch in your actions.
Main issues to my understanding are inability to shoot without drawing a bow to full length(So when using strong bow you loose ability to shoot weaker shots, which given situation sometimes are needed) and second issue is inability to use when you are not using correct form. For example when you are on horse, in a woods crouching. Basically it is clunky.
Given that they lacked ability to make magazines, I think they simply couldn't use this kind of tool because they couldn't create it(even Chinese repeating crossbow's magazine was full of limits because it only used gravity, so when you turned it sideways, bolts would fall out)
Joerg did this on one of his.
If you put a groove into it, you won't be able to loose it quickly enough and you also don't want to keep a 100+ lbs bow drawn at that draw for a long time. All that energy rests in the string and the bowstave while its on full draw. If you have any material faults, which could even be increased if the nook you are using isn't perfectly round. A single damaged strand on the string could be enough to have a cascade failure and resulting in the bow basically expending all that energy as the string snaps. Same with the bowstave.
Also with all due respect... a 20lbs bow will have a hard time to go through a gambeson or have any real, meaningful, penetration through leather. 20lbs isn't even enough for medium sized game. You need 40lbs at least with that to get any sort of meaningful penetration into the animal. So yeah... 20lbs repeating bows are fun, if you are hunting watermelons and 3D targets. It would be my "go to" choice for a bow to just muck about, but if you want to hunt game.. its at least 40lbs or you are pretty much stuck to hunting small game like rabbits and birds. And for fighting humans, that have armed and armored themselves with even just basic protection.. you need 60+ lbs. You can wound people with less draw weight, but those wounds are unlikely to be deep enough to actually incapacitate the enemy.
@@IshanDeston All your points are right but Joerg made this for "FUN".
If I was going against humans with this device the first thing i would change is the ammo.
1/ The arrows/bolts are hollow tubes with a head screwed on. a) Adapt the head so it is a loose fit held in place with some wax.(A "Bodking" would be good). b) place inside the shaft a short iron rod (striker), Fixes in place with a "Small" drop of wax to the rear.
c) Drill two small holes in the shaft near the head.
2/ Same as above but your "Striker" is to have a blunt point and attach a (.22) blank to the base of the head before you fit it..
3/ There are other ideas which use "Hollow" heads and liquids.
(And yes I would change the bow)
@@Geordun You are quicker at just taking a metal tube, fitting it tightly into a bigger metal tube at the end. Drill a hole into it, attach the tube on top of the wood, and fill it with some matchstick heads, put in a metal bearing, some cloth to hold it in place.. and light the matchsticks through the hole you drilled.
If you gonna change the design, you might as well do it properly ;)
@@IshanDeston Yes but i live in the U.K. and the police would be a wee bit upset if someone made them self a firearm or *ANYTHING* "to be used in Self Defence".(Yes it is illegal to make/purchase items for "*Active*" use in defending oneself)
Now if I "just" happen to have a *Fun* Bow and some "Funny" arrows, (but NOT the ones containing blanks) that's a different matter.
Maybe it's like an automatic gear box or a manual?
People say you should learn to drive a manual first.
Also, how do you know it never existed... It might have, just not in large enough numbers to be recorded. Yes I'm being picky.
Subscribed! Thanks Herr Jeorg for showing me an epic channel.
Also, we know that Persian and mongol archery would have a far greater rate of fire... Take Lars for example.
Definitely need to increase the arrow capacity, I keep saying it, Hilux design like the North Korea's newish Ak magazine.
Someone probably did, but by means of natural selection and actual use most like found it useless.
...and as he pointed Lars uses a very light draw weight bow (40 lbs) for his trick shots. Those things are ineffective in battle where most soldiers are at least wearing tough leather or heavy padded clothes, much less to those wearing metal armor, and remember your shooting hundreds of yards away.
The actual Mongols war bow used had 120 - 160 lbs draw, according to historians. It's way much heavier than what competitive/Olympic archers are using. As an archer myself, a well trained archer would probably take a decent amount of time to draw the bow, aim and shoot, relax for few seconds then do the process again. Now imagine trying doing that all day in battle.
The rail in which the string runs is off centre, so as the string is released as it moves to rest position, it must be rubbing the wood of the guide rail.
Have you noticed much string degredation at all?
the notch on the arrow holds it in the center for the most part
This is a good bridge between a normal bow and a crossbow. It can have the ease of use of a crossbow and the Speed (Even if you don't speed shoot you can shoot four and reload four more and shoot them in less time than many crossbows. Especially the stronger ones.) and accuracy of a bow. Plus it is likely cheaper and easier to make then a crossbow. Also it would be like the repeating crossbow but can have more power (power is set but bow used and archers ability to draw. Meaning you can have an 80 to 120 pound repeating bow).
And if you come up with some kind of universal attachment method then it can be used with any bow (of an approximate set draw length). This means if one bow breaks just remove it and attach it to another, personal bows enemy bows you name it it can be attached to and used by your people.
I have an idea for a period correct, technologically speaking, anti-aircraft turret sort of contraption. Use pedal power to spin a flywheel. The flywheel could control rotation, and elevation, as well as have the draw mechanism for a heavy crossbow, or ballista. Use a feeding system similar to the one shown. It could be mounted vertically, since it's a crossbow, and there could potentially be a hopper style loading system. Simply feed arrows or bolts into the hopper, and have a person, or team, keeping the flywheel spinning.
The low draw weight and rapid fire makes it better for close quarters combat like raiding or urban village warfare. Speed is more important in a stand off situation and the low draw weight isn't too bad since distance isn't a big factor.
I like that you mentioned how this could be used by militia and I agree. The ease at which it can apparently be used means that if you strapped that thing onto a bunch of light draw weight bows (50-70 lbs) you could create a decently armed militia force either in a pinch or to supplement a core of professional archers in a real army. An archer's weakest point is up close and personal, hence English longbowmen were issued falchions or other swords. Imagine if for every longbowman there were two or three IGK armed light bowmen to serve as skirmishers, flank guards, and longbowmen protectors. Their usefulness would be relegated to close range fighting, possibly even in urban settings. I know that English law in the Hundred Years' War required all free men of a certain age to own and be proficient with longbows, so this is a moot point, but other countries weren't so adamant; it just needed the right setting to flourish. On top of that, IGKs might be a cheaper, more manageable alternative to crossbows; they don't need to be huge things that require a guy to lay down and use his whole body to cock nor do they need to be made of steel to make shorter, more powerful bows. Crossbows were the weapon of the professional mercenary and soldier/guard; this could make for a peasant's equivalent. Again, it's all about the right setting and circumstances. Oh, and I'm pretty sure that raiders would love this for a lightning attack.
Great channel, much expertise and interesting to watch. Greetings from Germany!
Not sure I only just found this, so I apologize for the late comment.
Like all things in combat, the right tool used the right way.
I would think the power limitation remains valid with the magazine or not. You can only pull back so many times before your body can't do another. With the magazine, if you need 2-4 quick shots, you in theory would have them. Or you wouldn't have to keep it held on the string the entire time until you're ready to fire (not pulled back, just held in place on the string). Once you are, you just go through the motions of aim, pull, loose. An entire regiment of burst fire could be enough to intimidate a charge, and while they're scattered and trying to figure out what just happened, the trained and practiced archers are reloading, probably quite quickly if they've had any time to practice.
The limited training is I think the highlight of this technology. It take A LOT of practice for an archer to achieve "effective", much less "useful" in combat. With this, that training need drops dramatically, which for a low budget/manpower nation could mean more archers that require significantly less training/practice time. You mention the cross bow, but those are notoriously hard to cock. True some could punch through armor (I think), but you're talking about a weapon that takes a special method to cock, which takes time.
So back to that low budget/manpower nation, you could have all three.
1) You have your standard archers who have put in the time to be experts.
2) You have archers with this tech who basically have the exact same stopping power in their weapon but without the extensive training. (Alternately, you could have crossbows that are no harder to pull than a bow.)
3) You have the true crossbow that has that extra hard stopping power, but takes longer to cock each shot.
The versatility of the bow is a factor that is hard to argue against. I could be wrong, but I understand some archers would use their long bows like a staff if engaged up close. Not every time, and most had an arming sword instead, but the option was there, and wouldn't be with this thing.
I think this will pop up in fantasy stories, and I don't think that would be so bad. First it looks cool, which is enough for most. But those who think it all the way through could really build interesting stories, worlds, and tactics around the technology. I know I've got my brain working with where and how it would indeed be useful.
Hello sir, i do not know you nor nothing about bows, im a Joerg Fan :) and i do weapons in joerg style. but i have always been interested in Swords & Bows. so im your new subscriber!
what do you think about The use of a sight on top of the wood structure (yes, a bow with a sight, there is not much other chances to do such things)
and the use of special bolts like really long ones.
Sights are normal for bows these days, so adding a pin or reference point is not unusual. It wasn't used historically because there were other effective methods of sighting the bow, typically using the arrow as the reference point. Aiming was more instinctive and more versatile for different methods of shooting. Sights only really came about because of target shooting.
There is actually no speed advantage, because the time it takes to reload one arrow into the mag is longer than it takes to load one arrow in normal shooting, so overall you shoot slower than normal shooting.
Another big problem is that there is an optimal arrow weight for a given bow strength, so a full sized arrow is actually optimal for most war bows, not short bolts.
I like that design, it sure is inventive. I'd call it "Universal JS-IGK Bow Extension" :D. I can see how this could be potentially impractical though, as with olden days tools it will be harder to craft than a crossbow. Still, I think the best advantage is the improvement in aiming. Also, with four shots in a magazine, it may be easier to maintain stance. However first, one has to come up with the idea and that's a whole different story. It requires a genius to realize the potential of such magazine and then to actually build it. Joerg Sprave, indeed is a genius. A genius who uses rubber, and plywood. :D
JoergSprave if has living in the 13th century i think was like a Leonardo Da Vinci specialist in bow :) And today we has watching a movie "The JoergSprave Code" with Tom Hanks :)))))))
I can see it's use in horseback combat where you're rushing up to the enemy, getting off a few shots, and galloping away. That's one place where rapid fire and not having to manipulate arrows on a bouncing horse may have had a positive effect, possibly.
Castle defense. The ladders hit the walls and enemy begin to climb. Archer can lean out from cover and quickly let loose several arrows, where time is very critical to prevent a breach and also not spending time out of cover nocking arrows keeps him safer. Archer leans back into cover and sets down the bow and grabs a second bow, leans out and shoots some more. First bow is picked up by a squire, servant, or some other untrained person (or a melee fighter waiting for enemy troops to scale the wall) and reloaded , ready for the trained archer to grab. And so the cycle goes.
I like the rapid fire of your videos lately.
You can thank joerg
In my opinion there are few applications where something like Instant Genghis Khan could have seen use historically. Civilian uses such as hunting and self defense do not require high power as your target is unlikely to be wearing armor, whereas speed can be paramount due to the close distances involved in forests and cities. So I believe hunters, bandits, bodyguards and such might have preferred IGK instead of regular bows or crossbows. But yes, it really has no place in the battlefield.
I get that this concept can't really work for a high power bow, but it does work for the power bow you are comfortable with. The advantage I see over a crossbow (even one with a magazine), is that it can be kept loaded and "cocked" much faster... I see it as the bow equivalent of a pump shotgun; yeah, you can empty the magazine if you have to, but you can also top it off after one or two shots, during a pause, and then still have those four shots available if needed.
Jorge built this on the Mongolian bow as a concept, a what if, kinda like the posters from some years ago of an American Indian warrior on horseback with a compound bow... Would it have been a gamechanger, we'll never know!
Built as an integrated magazine on a more modern bow, even maybe a compound, this seems like a great device for the non-expert archer in a survival scenario, facing multiple attackers who also don't have guns, and not much else... Cause, never bring a bow to a gunfight! Pretty much why bows have been relegated to recreation, while guns are used for defense. I'm no archer, or historian, these are just my thoughts.
Compared to a modern rifle or shotgun, a bow is slower to shoot, much harder to aim, and much less powerful/less range. A .308 or shotgun blast will stop a man dead cold in a single hit. It could take 2 or 3 arrows and a few minutes for a bow to stop a threat. This bow design solves 2 of those issues. It makes it comparable in speed to a bolt action. You could mount a red dot and with a bit of practice be able to aim it as easy as a rifle. However the power and range issue is still a problem. You could use a modern fast acting poison, but that is a war crime I believe. There's nothing you could do about the range save for add more poundage/mechanical advantage. If you could shorten the limbs, perhaps similar to a triangle bow, you could use this 'tactically' similar to a rifle. That is, in a spread out formation, using cover, trenches, ect. Maybe even fire from prone by tilting the bow. But even then that would only "work" in a mad max like survival setting. Where enemies would be few in number and unarmored and under-gunned. In a more realistic situation, you'll be facing a guy with steel body armor and a AR. You'd be hopelessly outmatched.
On the medieval battlefield, these would do nothing against armored knights, and a massed charge by them would break through such spread out lines easily, as if they weren't there (assuming no earth works were prepared). At best, weapons like these would be used by skirmishers in forests, at close range, against infantry caught away from cavalry support. They would at least have a role though. Similar to repeating air guns used by the Austrians during the Napoleonic wars.
I'm an archer. I for one find no advantage in having such a device, since unlike the crossbow, you still must learn the skill to draw the arrow, knock it, aim and fire just like any ordinary archer, and training for it is considerable. If you are a trained archer it's much faster in the long run, to just do it the traditional way. Much convenient to in carrying it too.
You must understand, unlike bullets today, in the old day arrows are very expensive and hard make. You have the carpenters to make the shafts making them straight and of the same length and size, the fletcher to make and tie the feathers and the smiths to make the arrow heads (good steel is worth like gold at that time). In an army each archers are probably given a limited amount arrows to use and carry. In battle, with such a valuable resource the ordinary archer would probably aim more on accuracy to each single shot and making each shots count, since if the arrows ran out their basically dead.
i think this were to be use during war, it would be more useful in a defence situation, like when a whole line or archers starts launching arrows at incoming enemies.
traditionally, say that can launch 6 arrow with in X amount of time, thats grabbing the arrow from quiver, nock it, draw, release, repeat.
now they just eliminated time to take arrow out of the quiver, and nocking it, basicly reduced half the procedure,
so more arrow can be shoot with in a even shorter period of time frame, multiply that by 100,
that is a crazy amount of arrow flying towards enemy, more damage, more coverage.
reloading is rather quick too, so with 2 to 3 teams of archers taking turns on shooting, the over all effectiveness compare to traditional ways would be much much greater.
Well this looks like one of the best exemplars of a Sassainian Archery device from the 3rd to 7th centuries - the Panjagan (five device). No one is at all sure quite what or how this worked other than it allowed the mounted archer to fire 5 smaller arrows (small enough to require an arrow guide) eith er all at once OR equally likely very rapidly. This device was an at times key element in Sassinad "shower" shooting - very rapid shooting by stationery or "slowly" moving dense cavalry. The techniques were to disrupt infantry or attack mounted formations making them vulnerable to being shattered by a determined charge.
Nu Sama!! Try to use High draw power with a Chronograph (if possible) to test the Speed and efficiency!
The answer is simple even if you all don't like it, Because Jorg wasn't back then to invent it then. Sorry but that's the truth. It isn't because people weren't smart enough, they were. It isn't because people didn't have the Crafting skill or techniques to make these, or to make them in mass, They did. This stupid simple answer as stupidly simple as it is like I already said is they just in think of it. Simple.
I don't want to get on my high horse here but when did your comments section stop being archers/beginner archers and people interested in history and start being populated by people who get all of their information from the Robin Hood movie?
There are two main issues here making it impractical: firstly arrows were *expensive* which cannot be stressed enough. Therefore they were generally issued by armies (King Henry V had to order the removal of a feather from every goose in England prior to the Agincourt campaign just to get enough arrows to run out 5 minutes into the battle.) So arrows were not rapidly flung downrange as fast as possible, each one needed to count.
Secondly, and often overlooked.: Our ancestors were not idiots. They spent their time training for war, refining weapons, armour, tactics etc. Every historical weapon was designed for a role and refined until it worked. As Nusensei mentioned, the Chinese already had a magazine fed crossbow - they could have adapted it to bows but chose not to. People often assume that people from the past were stupid - they had exactly the same brains as modern people but with a lifetime of experience instead of armchair theorising.
People could be stubborn and stupid sometimes, like the guy who said they think matchlock is better than flintlock because the soldier are fine with the former.
It could have been used perfectly by robbers of all sorts. Not to shoot rider, but his mount, or armed, but unarmored civilians. Or it could have been used by specialised units in later times. Just imagine, Napoleonic times. There is some kind of entrenchment with fusilers, defending it. And attacking it, comes unit with repeating bows. Bows have less range, so it recieves incoming fire (bang, bang, bang) => 30% of attackers are killed or wounded. But those 70 % come closer and finish them off. Like easily.
Not to mention english longbowmen also had to bring their own arrows. Agincourt wasn't the only battle on that campaign though. Doubt they each fired 60+ arrows each in under 5 minutes.
Buried with the terra cotta army they found crossbows that were basically normal bows mounted to a stock that looked much like this with a grip and trigger. Adding a IGK style magazine to it would have been easy and pretty neat (mr sprave, if you see this, add a trigger to it!)
That's basically what the chu-ko-nu is.
@@NUSensei those gravity fed hip fire crossbows? They seem like they would be very hard to aim since it fires as soon as you reach full draw. But adding something like an archer's trigger release just behind the nock point on this would give you all sorts of benefits.
Advantages In a military setting:
#1 higher rate of fire
#2 dont need to take view off target to knock
#3 can be proficiently operated by untrained archers
#4 arrows cannot be shot by opponents with normal bow
#5 cheaper to manufacture than crossbows
6 uses Bolts and Bolts are cheaper to produce than Arrows
I think your Nr 3 is by far the strongest point
I think I'll only agree on #3
Tbh I love Joerg's instant legolas but I think it's impractical, like it has some disadvantages that made me think it still can't replace bows on medieval times.
@@53n47 mounted long bow archers?
you can make a turn leaver to make the spring come up and down quickly and drop all the arrows at once,
I don't think that would be easier or faster, or have any other advantage over repeatedly pulling the string back. Well, it would be fun.
@@DarxusC i think he is talking about reloading
yea make it automatic with a lever or air compression but that works more for crossbows i cant really think of a design that works for bows holding vertically that works and wont be clunkly i dont know how u would hold it while turning the lever, a button with a air compression tube sure but lever would be hard to hold in bow aiming position vertically
but im sure its possible
And then a few months later Joerg fix the drawing problem with a string of rubber :D Gotta love that guy!
And then basically every complaint was addressed by his addition of the pump-action mechanism, as well as the clip he created for the mini version which could be scaled up.
I was looking for your comment lol
if you really want to get snazzy, you could easily install a pulley+sled system inside the mechism inside the thing... have a sled that grips the string, attached via pulleys to a lever on the bottom, operated by the right hand to quickly pull the string back. Then just install a simple trigger. boom, turn every bow into a automatic crossbow xD
Would the string wear out faster too chafing against the wood with prolonged use
Hmmm... that's a good point of view
Yes and no, the largest force *should* be when releasing, in which case it is sat in the nock. The slight wear on the draw might damage the string there, but then again it could be mitigated, plus the effects of vibration could wear bows down more than we think. Not significantly is my answer. I don't think it will ruin them before they are too old anyway.
@@mandowarrior123 I was more thinking the rubbing during the draw where the "spring mechanism" is sandwiching the string between the arrow and the wood and the string rubbing there. . . but could go both ways if ya string is waxed good and proper it might just make the wood slick over time instead of wearing the string.? he will just have to thrash it and let us know lol. after all a steady drop of water over a long period of time can bore a hole in a rock so who knows what way it will go.
Interesting thoughts. I think it would've come in handy in certain situations and so they definitely wouldn't have just dismissed the idea of a repeating bow if someone had invented it back then (I don't think that's quite what you're saying anyway though, just that it wouldn't have replaced regular bows and changed the world). Regardless anyway, I think the main reason to invent the repeating bow is just because it was possible.
I'm thinking that if they had 2 of the bows, had a dedicated firer and reloader on the 2nd bow, it might work. It'll be harder to tell if the rapid-fire bow + reloader would be faster than 2 crossbowmen. Maybe 2 crossbowmen and 1 reloader for both?
They would be very useful in cities, for close quarter combat. Although they would need bigger versions
Really cool and accurate video.
I'd venture an opinion that a device like this would actually be perfect for an untrained militia because of a combination of factors... while the crossbow was preferred over the bow for its ease of use, it was slow and crossbowmen usually had to retreat between shots to reload lest they be cut down while reloading, while this device allows you to shoot multiple arrows in succession and has a relatively quick reload time compared to crossbows (while speed isn't as important as accuracy, the ability to reload quickly is one advantage the bow has over things like muskets and even crossbows so I feel like its usefulness should not be underestimated either)... yes it has a limited magazine, which is a limitation when compared to standard bow archery, but the crossbow has only one shot per reload and we consider it an effective battlefield weapon, so I'd venture the opinion that this device or others like it, if optimized for war, could be a very good "middle ground" between standard archery (which is a pure display of skill) and high-poundage crossbows (which could be considered expensive overkill in terms of reloading requirements to damage output ratio), giving unskilled militias a rough facsimile of the bow's tactical usage without needing to sink years of training into their archers... basically I could see an army mass producing these and handing them out to their conscript archers for massed battlefield fire, while more experienced troops would use warbows or heavy crossbows for specialist roles like sniping.
From a historical perspective, I think these would have been utilized by commoners and militias who had been conscripted but weren't professional, trained soldiers. Especially from a defense perspective, even a small number of unskilled archers would be devasting firing from atop or inside a castle or fort. I could also see the smaller crossbow style versions being a highly effective sidearm for infantry and cavalry.
No need to fire all the arrow that kick. But you have the possibility, IF needed. The cooking time is also much kicker than a cross bow.
1) training time is critical for an army. With this you can create a thousand off bowmen in a week!
And this tool is easier to manufacture than a cross bow.
2) u can use small arrow! So the ennemies canot sand back the arrows, using your munition against you. BUT you always can shoot the ennemies arrow, normal arrow. Just loading one by one in this case.
3) think about cavaleries archers !
They can charge, fire 6 time in the time off two normal shoot and with more facility, so it become easyer to ride your horse and shoot the same time. They will go back and reload after it, before coming again...
Devastating !
So this equipment is surely a great thing to have, in my point off view
what about having the spring on an unlockable axle so you can slide a clipped together bundle of X arrows into the magazine stripperclip style.
Or maybe have a special bow with a connection to clip the magazine assembly into place for quick release and exchange as a whole.
Don't forget the difference in ammunition. This bow shoots bolts and not arrows. Bolts are cheaper and easier to manufacture than arrows and with wooden vanes you can keep them for a hundred years in a castle storage, while normal arrows may have warped or had their fletching eaten away by mites or mice. :) I think this would've been a good weapon for castle defense. :)
From a Warfare perspective Archers don't do direct fire that often but instead use indirect fire over several hundred meters, usually over their own lines, because you don't get hundreds of men into position before your archers get overrun when the enemy is charging at you. Which means most of the time you gonna lob arrows. And you also don't even need to start with anything below 60 pounds when you fire at armed targets. And how little an 60ish pound bow does to armor can be seen on Trands channel, where he tried them on steelplates, helmets and chainmail. There could be some use in horse archery, but even then a rate of fire of 3 seconds should be more than enough to do passing runs at the enemy line, and you are not going to do that rapid fire on a horse either, with a weapon grade bow. That leaves only hunting and... well except for Emus... animals are not actually known to fight back in force.... also for home defense... i'd use a sword or an axe.. maybe with a shield. You can stand in a doorframe and be relatively safe to be flanked... and if they have archers, just don't go outside. A sword or an axe is so much less maintenance and your assailant doesn't need to do you the curtsey to let you string your bow... and you are surely not going to let your bow rest strung on a wall year around.
You seemed to be able to load it quicker in the second section with the car behind, how quick is it to load and shot just one arrow then repeat as you would with a normal bow ?
I could see it used right before a battle lob a bunch of arrows towards the enemy and then switch it out for a reg one where precision counts just what I think(thought about it some more same theory but have regular archers count to 5 or somthing then they can take care of the reload maybe like a 20 count or somthing and then have the repeaters shoot again and have reg archers hold off a bit and rinse and repeat similar to what something the army would do with the m249 use a 3 round burst and then have a second m249 use a 3 round burst) once again just throwing my 2 cents out is all lol
Oda nobunaga used that kind of strategy to defeat cavalry charge with squads of musketeers (remember how musket can be very tedious to reload). So it's actually a proven ages old strategy.
Granted, oda used musket, not bow and arrows.
I don't know if arrows shot from this model will be able to stop galloping horse, but I guess it may work to a certain extent.
@@spearsage like I said it's just what I think I'm just talking about the rapid fire concept I doubt this bow would have the power to lob the bolts that far but I'm sure people back the where more stronger and used to using have draws that it tech could be a viable option with a stronger draw bow so who really knows but somthing worth considering
@@prpunk187 Agree. Nu sensei also showed that there is a fast way to reload the bow (which is quite easy as well). And should the contraption break or malfunctioned, the user could just strip it away and use the bow normally.
The only problem here probably there was no Jeorg Sprave to design this in the past 😉
Muskets took a long time to load and they still used them
There's no strength requirement for a musket, lots of bodies and volley fire fixes the low fire rate
@JThorsson Bael Invictus It just wasn't worth the trouble, rate of fire isn't as important as saving money in combat.
Yeah you get kick ass bows, but you double the cost of the bow, more than triple the ammo needed (archers usually shot until they ran out of arrows anyway) and made another part on the bow that could break, it's easier and cheaper just to draft a few more guys and give them crossbows
Infinite power and godly accurate. Japan is the best case study, best bows & archers in world, first to transition to matchlocks. Why? Matchlocks require MORE training and cost, no shortage of skilled archers. Because when you get shot with a thick ass musket ball, you know about it. Nothing like tiny bullets. And armour would stop it, but that armour is heavy, and not cheap. They have stopping power on their side. Japanese used guns so big they couldn't stand up and firing them without falling over (or they fell to absorb recoil, its a whole martial art anyway. Or was.) skilled people can dodge/deflect (lethal)arrows, guns can be aimed for as long as you like, almost. Guns can be fired prone in ambush, massed fire can be used easily, they scare horses, and they penetrate at much longer ranges than most archery (japanese archery in war was done at excessive ranges up to 400m, in excess of guns, however it is stated don't bother shooting at more than 20m if you want to hit/hurt anything in war.(criticism samurai were training at too long ranges)
the strongest tactic pre-gun in japan was shock cavalry. On the battlefield in heavy rain (considered by most at the time the worst weather for matchlocks) were tried by shock cavalry and they were massacred. Horses die far quicker with ball cavitation, wounds were catastrophic (you either stop with armour or do not stop, no real mitigation of damage like with arrows) and they plain got more shots in. They used extra men to help reload iirc, but the extra (effective) range is what did it. Also bullets break bones, which is substantially more debilitating than piercing bones, though i have no doubt arrows sometimes did that too.
cause they were easier than teaching how to use bows
thats why we use guns nowadays, that was just the beginning of guns and Technology about guns that's why no one uses muskets anymore
@J Thorsson How would you lug this thing around and keep it protected from the weather? Both traditional bows and muskets are relatively easy to store and lug of around. Most of battlefield combat through most of history was walking or taking a boat to enemy territory through various weather conditions.
These did exist prior to Joerg. You can find references to them in many different forms in the old Saracen Archery book.
There was a similar device used against Rome i.e. The Belly Bow which later became the Crossbow. Also you are assuming that person using this device will be *standing*.
But in history sometimes the Crossbow/heavy bow was used from the sitting position (I think it was the Han).
With a heavier bow ,sitting this would be ideal for ambushing!
With this device you end up with something between a Bow and the Crossbow, A Jack of all trades.
What about close combat?
You can field large numbers of soldiers armed with automatic crossbows as an engagement weapon much like how the Romans equipped their infantry with Pila's. The Pila was used before formations closed in for melee. The Pila thrown would impale shields making them useless or right out injure or kill enemies.
What if infantry was equipped with these bows that they used before they go to their sword or spears? Combine the automatic bows with stripper clips for bolts and you got a rapid fire close range weapon. How much damage would a soldier be able to inflict before he's forced to use his melee weapon?
For home defense yes that's a deadly weapon vs anything other then a real gun.
I wonder if you'd get serious problems with the bow, at military draw weights. It is hard on arrows in general, when they are shot from a powerful bow. If they rubbed against a magazine as they were loosed, they might splinter to pieces.
I think you are overlooking a huge advantage this has and that it shoots bolts that cant is shot back, compare the firing speed vs a Mongolian arrow guide. Two ideas I had were 1, square bolts with small holes drilled and 'pinned' together in the front and back with small breakable dowl to make a stripper clip. The second would be to build a frame that holds the regular bolts and 'glue' them together with wax and a dowl to keep the wax a bit stiffer and keep them straight.
Arrows from war bows shatter on impact for the most part.and your opponent would just copy you if it worked.
Safer than a Tong-Ah if its able to load a wider range of arrow sizes than the bows draw length would normally dictate?
I want to buy this arrow magazine. Where can I buy it?
Sometimes its culture that make it hard for new weapon to be adapted. People will try to find excuses why a new expensive tools is not worthy replacement for crossbow or bow..
For me, this kind of weapon is simply perfect for defending a castle or a wall. The line of fire for those on the wall is just one line, while hordes of enemy is trying to scale it.
It was fast, accurate, reducing eror cause by stress, and it still had enough firepower to deal damages to light armored oponent
How about volley fire? Basically suppressing fire where a massed rank fires 4 arrows each in quick succession And then the other one fires. From what I understand bows where mostly a psychological weapon when fighting armoured European troops. And from what I understand its power and accuracy is actually not to shabby. And early gunpowder weapons had alot of weaknesses as well and people still kept using that.
I would like to have several objections on Instant Genghis Khan impracticality.
The videos title, and the main content focuses on the repeating feature of the device, and seems to believe that's the only thing it offers. That's not true. There are multiple other advantages it comes with, especially the 8th generation following this video:
1. The device provides a stable platform for sights to be mounted on, even a traditional iron sight will be much better than aiming with naked eye.
2. It increases people's firing speed under stressful condition. The several videos you provide are people shooting in a peaceful place, not on a battlefield. Studies have shown stress and fear of enemies can drastically increase human error. The device ensure the string always extend at the same direction with no shaking; you remain stable on horseback; and you don't spend time grabbing your quiver and risk pouring them out due to panic.
3. Without needing to spend extra training time on remaining calm, more potential archers can be recruited. Similar to crossbowmen.
4. In fact, since the 8th gen effectively turns it into a crossbow, you do not need to manufacture crossbows independently, a country only needs to mass produce one type of bow; the less trained is equipped with this device, while those need to be stealthy or compact doesn't have one. This thing can even mount on a platform and with extra magazine, turns into a machine gun.
Perhaps this thing was not invented, was because no countries had the manufacturing capability; the wooden body makes preservation hard to find, or that by the time human were capable to, firearms are matured enough and widely spread.
I disagree. While you do list several other advantages, they are essentially those of the crossbow, which we already had in history. The distinguishing and *relevant* feature of this device is indeed the repeating feature, which is appropriate as the main focus.
In warfare 13th century or so flexibility would matter knowing you can draw an arrow anytime you need to with the igk you need to keep count of your bolts so you can back down for reload.