Entradas populares

martes, 10 de mayo de 2011

Exotic ancient weapons: (II) Nagamaki

.
The Nagamaki ("long-wrapped handle", also known as Nagakami) is a medieval type of Japanese polearm (it can also be considered a sword - its handling art is more sword-like).European medieval polearms were usually spears with axeheads (halberd), while Japanese ones were usually swords with much lengthened shafts/grips. Europeans also had the latter (glaive), but the importance of both categories was reversed.The most important and most famous Japanese polearm is surely the Naginata, which is similar to a Katana blade on a very long shaft.An early rival to the Naginata was the Nagamaki. Unlike the Naginata, it had about as much shaft length as blade length. At least some Nagamakis blades were furthermore straight instead of curved (still one-edged, though) and thus better usable as spears at the small expense of lesser slashing and cutting qualities.The Nagamaki first attracted my interest because of its look, but it's also an interesting example of a weapon being optimised for a niche.The long shaft offered some stand-off in melee, while the long blade made it easier to hit difficult targets in slashing movements. Target such as horse legs, for example - a target that was supposedly an important one for Nagamaki wielder in the 12th to 14th century. It did fit the same purpose as the Chinese Zhanmadao, a curved sword with very long blade. The Japanese also followed this path with the Nodachi. The Nagamaki apparently lost relevance when mounted combat lost relevance in Japanese warfare. ("Das Lexikon der Kampfkünste", Werner Lind).Cost-wise, Nagamakis were more expensive than Naginatas because of the longer blade, but less expensive than the likewise rare Nodachis. Many Nagamakis were probably modified to swords with normal grip length during the 15th and 16th centuries, and it appears as if in part for this reason no extant medieval copies are known.Two-handed weapons like this had a very different history in Europe than in East Asia.European two-handed weapons were either spears for close-order tactics (hoplites, Landsknechte), used before body armour was commonly affordable (Germanic frame) or used after body armour became so extremely good that shields became unnecessary (halberds, glaives; late medieval age till 17th century). The European development ended in the bayonet.The Japanese did use two-hand weapons extensively in the medieval age without fitting into these categories well. Especially the Japanese warrior-monks with their Naginatas left an impression.

Two-hand weapons (especially spears) were also most important in Chinese military history, most likely because of the threat of mounted steppe warriors.

Eventually, East Asia adopted the bayonet as well for a few decades and the northern hemisphere was finally united in regard to two-handed melee weapons. Until then, there were both similarities and differences in two-hand melee weapon development - and the Nagamaki is as far as I know without a close Western counterpart.
S O
.

View the original article here

Yet another embarrassing air war in a fair weather scenario

.
At least some of the combat aircraft involved in the current air campaign against Libyan loyalists are taking off as far away as from Germany and the UK.This reminds me of the 1999 air war against Yugoslavia when combat aircraft took off in Northern Italy, not in the more close Southern Italy. This time it's just more extreme.

Well, is this about a fetish for tanker aircraft? Europeans such as the French are generally not the usual suspects for this.Is it about an inability to deploy quickly to Mediterranean airfields, such as on Sicily? The whole affair developed over days, and my expectation is that a lag of several days should be enough for the deployment of a squadron or two.That's what air forces buy transport aircraft for, after all!
A similar observation is about the campaign being led by some U.S. air force staff so far. Several participants want to transfer command to a NATO staff.WTF? Why isn't it possible to form an ad hoc staff? Air campaign operational leadership is not quantum physics, after all. Most of the planning can be done (and is usually done) by the involved wings and squadrons - the pilots - themselves, anyway.Again, I have substantially higher expectations here than the European air force officer corps seem to be able to meet.

And then there's the cruise missile salvo, which seems to have addressed the stationary air defence batteries. Let's face it; by now all combat aircraft can be expected to be invulnerable to the 1960's air defence missiles which are way beyond their shelf life and serviced by as far as is known ill-trained and ill-motivated troops, if any.This "destruction of enemy air defences first" mantra has developed its own life, is able to sustain itself even in face of paper air defences.


Thus we have yet another air war in near-perfect terrain and weather conditions, against a de facto defenceless target and still lots of behind the scenes embarrassments for air forces from "the West".
S O
.

View the original article here