The chu ko nu

exactly how was the chu ko nu a revolutionary weapon?
>it shot arrows really FAST.
yes, but apart from that what?
Also
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gastraphetes

Probably the need for higher powered crossbows due to the proliferation of effective armour in Europe.

>>2713466
Seriously how much would these weapons have changed feudal warfare in europe ?
The chu ko nu could fire much faster than the longbow and even better, just shoot in one area and restrict enemy troop movement

>>2713498
Even a the standard crossbow of the Latter Han dynasty could have penetrated the armor and shields of the Roman legions.

>>2713466
It was basically the handgun of the time for common people.

Literally anyone with a hand could operate it without any stress. And it provided adequete defense for common people on the frontiers.

>>2713454
>>2713508
>>2713504
The chu ko nu was weak as shit, though. Do you really think an action like that allows for a powerful draw?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polybolos

fucking plebs

>>2713570
you could fire 10 bolts in 15 seconds
give 1000 chu ko nus to 1000 people you get 10000 bolts shot every 15 seconds, that would completely stop an enemy's advance and at close range it would just destroy the enemy shield

>>2713631
10 bolts in 15 seconds is worthless if you can barely penetrate their denim jorts and t-shirts.

>>2713631
bolts that travel at what velocity? what was the efficient range of this chyna-supa-weapon? how come they didn't conquer the world with it when it was so overpoweredly good?

>>2713631
Sure anon but
>The Chinese repeating crossbow had a maximum range of 120 meters, with an effective range of 80 metres (260 ft)
>A 667 N (150 lbf) Mary Rose replica longbow was able to shoot a 53.6 g (1.89 oz) arrow 328 m (359 yd) and a 95.9 g (3.38 oz) a distance of 249.9 m (273.3 yd).[28]
See the difference?
Also, being able to use a lot of arrows means you have to carry around a lot of arrows.

>>2713640
>>2713646
>>2713653
It was effective in close range, obviously since it's a repeating crossbow, but it still means that your archers could obliterate the enemy infantry before they can even reach your own infantry

>>2713686
>could obliterate the enemy infantry
Not if they have armour and/or shields. Which is why the Chinese mainly used conventional crossbows.

>>2713686
So essentially you've got an army of guys with semi-automatic shotguns and told them they'll be fine on the battlefield, when everyone else is walking around with bolt action rifles.

>>2713686

Aka.

They were useless unless the enemy has barley any armor and stands 10ft away from you.

>>2713686
'cept of course, infantry carries shields, chainmail or leather that'll stop this any second. It makes a FINE AS FUCK civilian/police weapon though.

>>2713454
>Zhugenu.jpg
>This weapon was invented during the three kingdoms era
That's a myth btw.
It's a Spring and Autumn period invention and there's no more proof that Kong fucking Ming invented it or improved its design than there is that he invented the fucking wheelbarrow.
Just another legendary tall tale to further aggrandize what is very likely the most overrated figure in chinese history.

>>2713454
I've seen a replica which had an effective range of no more than 45 meters. Period ones relied on poisoned bolt tips to actually do the damage, the power of it is quite underwhelming.

All it did was make itself heavier for the sake of not having to fumble with putting a new bolt in. However putting a new bolt in wasn't that much of a time sink compared to actually drawing the bow and aiming.