What is the top speed of a fencing weapon?

[eroomynohtna]

I apologize if this is not the correct subforum for this topic.

There are several unsubstantiated claims of speed in fencing, including one on the United States Fencing Association's website. http://usfencing.org/resources/fencing-facts (#3) This led to a long discussion in which this forum was referenced, and I was impressed with the knowledge displayed.

I have heard several claims regarding the speed of the tip of a weapon. The first is that other than a bullet, it is the fastest thing in sport. Some people even claim to have heard a fencer's weapon break the sound barrier. Unfortunately, there is no evidence of how fast the tip goes, so all arguments break down into speculation. Are there any simple experiments (simpler than a high speed camera) or any thought experiments to go about confirming or disproving either claim? I have a list of the top speeds in other sports if anyone is interested.

Another myth is less a myth than an assumption most people make about which weapon is the fastest. There are three weapons in fencing: foil, epee, and saber. Most people specialize in one and argue only its virtue. Many foilists argue that fastest action in fencing is a "flick" in foil, during which a fencer causes his blade to bend around another blade or to obscured target. I think most saber fencers assume saber is the fastest simply because it looks the fastest. The "chest cut" is largely agreed to be the fastest cut in saber, but some people believe it is when the blade hit the opponent's guard and "whips" over that the tip goes the fastest. Some things to note are that the foil is more flexible than a saber and is more tip-heavy. Sabers are more rigid, lighter at the tip, and better balanced. Most people don't consider epee in the running for top speed, and its blades are the heaviest and stiffest.

If anyone has any questions, I will be more than happy to clarify.

 

[chaoseverlasting]

I guess one way to do it would be to measure how much force a fencer can generate with their respective weapon. That shouldn't be too hard to do, although I don't really know the exact apparatus you would need.

Once you have that, you know the material properties of each blade, and can calculate the how it would react to the force ( how it would bend etc).

Since you know the above, you could measure the speed (velocity) at which the tip or any other part of the blade oscillates (I'm guessing it would be some form of SHM) and its that SHM which would give you the maximum and minimum velocity of the blade.

While you're doing this, the two cases that I can think of right now would be when a fencer stops the blade without hitting anything (ie naturally) and when the blade is blocked (forceful stoppage).

Its probably during the forceful stoppage of the blade that you would get your all time max velocity as the blade would effectively become 'shorter' in that it would vibrate around the point of contact (of the two blades, if one blade blocks another) and the shorter length would lead to a higher frequency of vibration and thus higher velocity.

As far as the specifics are concerned, I have no idea about fencing and the different properties of different blades. Hope this helps.

 

[jtbell]

"There was a young fellow named Fisk
Whose fencing was exceedingly brisk;
So fast was his action
The Lorentz contraction
Reduced his rapier to a disk."

 

[mugaliens]

Interestingly, my neighbor across the hall is a weapons expert, and he has a wall full of blades ranging from a 40-lb monster of a broadswoard to his blade of choice, which is the rapier for it's ridiculous lightning speed.

As an individual interested in the martial arts, he and I took a trip to the local gym, where we discovered that while he could certainly dispatch me with a rapier, he could never escape death himself, except perhaps by those who know few/little/no martial arts.

We also discovered something else. In accordance with the laws of my own state and 43 others here in the United States, I carry a firearm on a routine basis.* We also discovered that beyond about 15 feet, my firearm trounced his rapier, even if thrown. Yes, he may very well indeed pierce my heart, but I still have 10 seconds in which to pull the trigger on 17 rounds in my firearm.

Bottom line: When two top-notch folks are lined up for the death, the decision goes to the one who decided not to show up in the first place, or to the own who instead decided to leverage today's technology to take out his oppononent by means of stealth.

* I know many people in the UK might find this "offensive." Please understand your sociopolitic environment and mine are very different. It's nothing for me to eat breakfast in a crowded restaurant full of kids here in the US while wearing a firearm, and to be quite frank, neither the kids nore their parents think anything of it. In fact, on a couple of occasions they've asked questions which I've entertained with them and their parents. I might argue they're the safer for it, as my eye is on the bad guy (yes, I've been amply trained), and because of 20 years of military training, if the call to arms ever does come, I know I won't miss. Still, the sight of anyone wearing a firearm in your country would result in numerous calls to your police. I understand that. However, please do not confuse my posting my thoughts and experiences about this with actually carrying arms, as some knee-jerk reactionists on another forum have done.

Thank you.

I would also extend this to you: If you feel I am wrong on the subject, please let me know via PM why you feel so. Here in the US, open carry is allowed in 43 of our 50 states, and concealed carry is allowed in 48 (I think) of our states. I am not arguing for any cause in this thread, so please do not wrongly ascribe any such motives. If you'd like to take things up with me via PM, I will be happy to interact with you in that forum.

 

[mugaliens]

My entire point is that with what I and my neighbor (and rapier expert) know of self defence, if I'm within about 20 feet of someone with a rapier, I'm either better off closing rapidly with my hands (assuming I'm an expert in martial arts, which I'm not) or retreating to the use of a firearm. As for me, I would drawn and block, but only fire if he hurled his rapier or other blade towards me.

 

[mugaliens]

Another myth is less a myth than an assumption most people make about which weapon is the fastest. There are three weapons in fencing: foil, epee, and saber. Most people specialize in one and argue only its virtue. Many foilists argue that fastest action in fencing is a "flick" in foil, during which a fencer causes his blade to bend around another blade or to obscured target. I think most saber fencers assume saber is the fastest simply because it looks the fastest. The "chest cut" is largely agreed to be the fastest cut in saber, but some people believe it is when the blade hit the opponent's guard and "whips" over that the tip goes the fastest. Some things to note are that the foil is more flexible than a saber and is more tip-heavy. Sabers are more rigid, lighter at the tip, and better balanced. Most people don't consider epee in the running for top speed, and its blades are the heaviest and stiffest.

If anyone has any questions, I will be more than happy to clarify.

Interesting discussion! I've love to get my high-school chum online, who wound up being a fencing champion at a prestigious Virginia university. Sadly, he simply doesn't do this!

I think it largely depends upon what you want to do. I mentioned the "rapier" earlier, but that's the guy across the hall. I think my HS chum favored the foil, and again, his reasoning was rapidity and precision of blade movement. In fact, I recall a 1983 quote from him: "It doesn't matter how well they parry. If I can pierce his heart, he's dead. All I have to do at that point is retreat while the dead man tries to defeat me."

Yeah, I know, it's a long quote to remember, but he was a very gifted friend (and a 4.0 valedictorian of our HS).

I tend to recall what he says.

He's a doctor, now, I think. We lost touch.

 

[eroomynohtna]

Since you know the above, you could measure the speed (velocity) at which the tip or any other part of the blade oscillates (I'm guessing it would be some form of SHM) and its that SHM which would give you the maximum and minimum velocity of the blade.

While you're doing this, the two cases that I can think of right now would be when a fencer stops the blade without hitting anything (ie naturally) and when the blade is blocked (forceful stoppage).

Its probably during the forceful stoppage of the blade that you would get your all time max velocity as the blade would effectively become 'shorter' in that it would vibrate around the point of contact (of the two blades, if one blade blocks another) and the shorter length would lead to a higher frequency of vibration and thus higher velocity.

I don't think that simple harmonic motion would be the way to go to achieve maximum possible velocity. I've tried to create such a situation, and any speed I achieve has always been far surpassed by a simple slashing motion. I don't know if it's a problem with forearm strength, blade flexibility, or inability to change direction quickly enough, but I am 99% sure it would be impossible for all other people, too.

I have found a motion resembling a tennis serve or badminton smash seems the fastest to me.

There's a thing called "whipover." That happens when the end of your opponent's blade hits your guard and the last foot or so bends over your guard and hits you on your arm. Do you think that would increase speed? I had always assumed it would slow down the tip, because the kinetic energy is now being stored as potential in the flex of the blade.

 

[Office_Shredder]

There's a thing called "whipover." That happens when the end of your opponent's blade hits your guard and the last foot or so bends over your guard and hits you on your arm. Do you think that would increase speed? I had always assumed it would slow down the tip, because the kinetic energy is now being stored as potential in the flex of the blade.

That might be the fastest assuming it is allowed to flex back to a straight blade. You store up potential energy in the blade by bending it, and then when it whips out the potential energy is all converted to kinetic energy again

 

[eroomynohtna]

That might be the fastest assuming it is allowed to flex back to a straight blade. You store up potential energy in the blade by bending it, and then when it whips out the potential energy is all converted to kinetic energy again

Would it spring back faster than it had been traveling previously?

 

[cjl]

Most likely, yes.

 

[Office_Shredder]

Take a rubber band. Slowly stretch it out. Then let go. It certainly snaps back faster than when you pulled it.

 

[Danger]

Some people even claim to have heard a fencer's weapon break the sound barrier.

That should be easy enough to test. We all know that a whip's tip exceeds the sound barrier on a regular basis. It seems to me that a foil, due to its construction, would be the fencing weapon most likely to match that. Wouldn't it be relatively simple to mount a sound transducer either on the tip or close to the target area which could register a "sonic boom"?
Mugaliens, I'm with you on your firearms stance. It's illegal to carry a handgun at all here in Canada, so of course I carried concealed. Condition 1 Llama IX .45 in a home-made inside-the-waistband holster just to the right of my spine. All of the local cops, and the judge in my trial when I finally had to be busted due to a civilian complaint, knew that I was armed. They also knew whose side I was on. If something busted loose, they knew that I'd be shooting with them, not at them.
I'm certain they knew because in my capacity as a waiter/bartender I used to serve the judge and his court staff and the RCMP staff their lunches on court days. Back then, I wore a tight (I think that it's called a "sweater vest" in the States; like a knitted tank-top) over a Super Blackhawk .44 Magnum with a 7 1/2" barrel in an upside-down shoulder holster. It wasn't exactly subtle.
In 35 years, though, it came out of the holster only once... and that was resolved with no shots fired. I have no use for the more vocal NRA freaks, but a trained person carrying for a legitimate reason has my respect.

 

[Office_Shredder]

I think this kind of brings into question how far down you're allowed to go. A tennis serve goes 120 mph say, but if there's forespin then the part of the ball spinning forward will be traveling even faster. Does that count? Because it's no different than measuring just the tip of a sword being swung

 

[Danger]

A tennis serve goes 120 mph say, but if there's forespin then the part of the ball spinning forward will be traveling even faster. Does that count?

I believe that it does, as in sports speeds. The original question, however, asked specifically about fencing. In that context, the tennis reference is irrelevant.

 

[mugaliens]

There's a thing called "whipover." That happens when the end of your opponent's blade hits your guard and the last foot or so bends over your guard and hits you on your arm. Do you think that would increase speed? I had always assumed it would slow down the tip, because the kinetic energy is now being stored as potential in the flex of the blade.

I can't see how it might increase tip velocity, as at the moment of contact all forces (save vibrational) are reducing the tip velocity, and the vibrational forces are minute in comparison.

I did a little more reading, and there are three weapons currently in use with fencing, the sabre, epee, and foil. They might be capable of breaking the sound barrier, if pushed hard enough. The foil is the lightest, while the Epee was invented in the second half of the 19th century by some folks who thought the foil was both too light and not realistic. Meanwhile, the sabre is a cutting weapon, though still quite modern and stylistically used for fencing.

Regardless, I can break the sound barrier with the tip of a dampened towel, much to my brother's chagrin when we were children!

Sorry bro, but you snapped me first...

And yes, as documented by strobe photography, it does indeed break the sound barrier, as can any whip.

 

[DaveC426913]

If something busted loose, they knew that I'd be shooting with them, not at them.

The issue is not whose side they are on while shooting,
it is that a civilian - whose skills and training are a complete unkown to any but himself (a loose cannon, as it were) - is shooting at all.

And no, their assurances that I can trust their training, temperament and judgment are insufficient.

But you've had this discussion many times before, I'm betting.

 

[Office_Shredder]

I believe that it does, as in sports speeds. The original question, however, asked specifically about fencing. In that context, the tennis reference is irrelevant.

The first is that other than a bullet, it is the fastest thing in sport

confirming or disproving either claim

The original question was about fencing, and speeds compared to speeds in other sports. Unless you're of the 'tennis is not a sport' crowd (which is very small I think)

I can't see how it might increase tip velocity, as at the moment of contact all forces (save vibrational) are reducing the tip velocity, and the vibrational forces are minute in comparison.

It's not going to increase speed when it hits the hilt, the speed is going to be when the sword slides off the hilt and snaps back to being straight

 

[eroomynohtna]

I think this kind of brings into question how far down you're allowed to go. A tennis serve goes 120 mph say, but if there's forespin then the part of the ball spinning forward will be traveling even faster. Does that count? Because it's no different than measuring just the tip of a sword being swung

I know that Andy Roddick's record 155 mph serve does not account for spin. Not being a tennis player, I'd stick with their criteria for speed when comparing tennis players, but I would count the spin in an intersport discussion. Although I wouldn't count anything like vibration speed of the strings.

However, I don't think that measuring spin on a tennis ball is an equivalent level of nitpicking to measuring just the tip of a fencing weapon. I'd say a more appropriate comparison to measuring the speed of the tip compared to (whatever else you would measure instead) would be measuring the speed of the tennis ball vs the speed of the racket.

By the way, instantaneous velocities from badminton far surpass tennis. But due to the rapid slowing immediately after the hit, tennis and badminton players argue a lot about which sport is really faster, adding an instantaneous-or-average speed layer of difficulty to the discussion.

It's not going to increase speed when it hits the hilt, the speed is going to be when the sword slides off the hilt and snaps back to being straight

I would say that is an atypical action, but it does happen. http://flickershutter.com/June 18, 2006 SCHMF/pages/136g.html

 

[Danger]

The original question was about fencing, and speeds compared to speeds in other sports.

The statement that you quoted was poorly expressed. I was thinking along the same line that Eroomynohtna mentioned. Some of those sports nuts who know every possible statistic might consider the surface speed of the ball to be relevant, but I'm pretty sure that officially it has to be the speed of the ball as a whole. I should have put more effort into the post.

 

[Gokul43201]

The issue here is, not whether you feel you are capable of handling a shoot-out, should the need arise, but whether that is your call in the first place.

The issue here is actually the speed of a fencing weapon. Can we save the gun-rights discussion for the politics forum?

 

[nismaratwork]

I forget the name of this manuever, but in foil fencing there is a specific close move in which you first gain advantage and then contact in one go. You move from the ready position (foil extended) and then raise the arm, dropping the tip of the foil so that the foil is parrallel to your body, and perpendicular to the ground. In the same motion you pull the flat of the foil across your body to intercept an incoming lunge, stepping towards your opponant in a lunge. At the termination of the block, your (for right dominant) right arm is across your body, about neck-level, and you swing the foil back towards you, then snap it up and out. The foil flexes like a whip, and if all is done properly, the tip makes contact with your opponent, and you get a point.

I bring this up, as an example where the tip is elusively being employed as a whip-like weapon. I just want to add, a foil isn't a weapon, it's not a representation of a rapier than anyone would use, so this would NOT work with a real blade. Of course.

I also wonder how this compares to the faster ends of the drawing strike in Iaido/Iaijutsu.

 

[nismaratwork]

No.

This does:





The issue here is, not whether you feel you are capable of handling a shoot-out, should the need arise, but whether that is your call in the first place.



A citizen wielding a gun, without any badge that says "I am a trained poilce officer whose responsibility it is to wield this weapon to ensure your safety", is indeed a loose cannon. (The fact that you might save lives does not change that.)

If I saw you pull a weapon in a shootout, I would be perfectly within my rights and responsbilities to view you as you as a dangerous threat to the public and disarm you.

Anyone carrying concealed or open should be trained to recognize the situations in which lethal force is required, and frankly those situations are not that vague. If someone has an open blade within 8-10 feet of you, or a firearm and clear intent to commit bodily harm, you draw and shoot to kill. Anyone who talks about "wounding" to disable, is already in the realm of a use for a handgun that is simply NOT useful. If you can accurately assess when someone poses a mortal threat, and you think of drawing a handgun as a de facto lethal response, the calculus is simple.

If someone has a pistol drawn, and is robbing you, I believe that you'd be a fool to do anything except comply. If someone has a knife drawn at say, 25 feet, and closing, you should NOT shoot until you give a verbal warning, and they continue to close distance. Anything within 10 feet should be considered a mortal threat.

How does this make someone a loose cannon, when they are licensed by their state to carry a handgun for the purposes of defense of their person and/or property? That isn't a badge, but it is a license to own and "operate" a firearm in accordance with established laws regarding self-defense.

 

[DaveC426913]

As Gokul pointed out, this is indeed off-topic. I'll be brief. And then we should stop or take it offline.

"Anyone carrying concealed or open should be trained to recognize the situations in which lethal force is required,"
"Should be" is not necessarily good enough for the innocent citizen standing next to him. Police are beholden to their badge, job. A gun-wielding citizen has simply acting on his own sense of logic, about which that innocent citizen knows nothing.

"How does this make someone a loose cannon, when they are licensed by their state to carry a handgun for the purposes of defense of their person and/or property?"
Note that, what sparked this was: "If something busted loose, they knew that I'd be shooting with them, not at them." - which is kind of loosey-goosey about "defense of their person or property". See what I mean about individuals making their own decisions on the situation?

 

[nismaratwork]

As Gokul pointed out, this is indeed off-topic. I'll be brief. And then we should stop or take it offline.

"Anyone carrying concealed or open should be trained to recognize the situations in which lethal force is required,"
"Should be" is not necessarily good enough for the innocent citizen standing next to him. Police are beholden to their badge, job. A gun-wielding citizen has simply acting on his own sense of logic, about which that innocent citizen knows nothing.

"How does this make someone a loose cannon, when they are licensed by their state to carry a handgun for the purposes of defense of their person and/or property?"
Note that, what sparked this was: "If something busted loose, they knew that I'd be shooting with them, not at them." - which is kind of loosey-goosey about "defense of their person or property". See what I mean about individuals making their own decisions on the situation?

Should is indeed an unfortunate standard, but then, if you shoot someone and it's not justifiable, you're on trial for murder. I believe that the standard of training for civilians should be high, although different from a police officer who doesn't have the option to shoot in the same way as a civilian. Still, the term loose cannon seems extreme. I would be happy to debate this in a thread you create, if you care to, otherwise as requested I'll drop it.

 

[eroomynohtna]

I forget the name of this manuever, but in foil fencing there is a specific close move in which you first gain advantage and then contact in one go. You move from the ready position (foil extended) and then raise the arm, dropping the tip of the foil so that the foil is parrallel to your body, and perpendicular to the ground. In the same motion you pull the flat of the foil across your body to intercept an incoming lunge, stepping towards your opponant in a lunge. At the termination of the block, your (for right dominant) right arm is across your body, about neck-level, and you swing the foil back towards you, then snap it up and out. The foil flexes like a whip, and if all is done properly, the tip makes contact with your opponent, and you get a point.

You're describing a prime parry at close distance that is finished with a flick. That type of action is classified as infighting. It is also significantly less common since 2005, but still happens often enough.

I do not believe this is a particularly fast maneuver, just surprising when well executed.

I bring this up, as an example where the tip is elusively being employed as a whip-like weapon. I just want to add, a foil isn't a weapon, it's not a representation of a rapier than anyone would use, so this would NOT work with a real blade. Of course.

Yes, the blades people fence with in foil and saber are significantly lighter and more flexible than even the lightest dueling swords. In epee, they start to approach real values.

I also wonder how this compares to the faster ends of the drawing strike in Iaido/Iaijutsu.

The weight difference is so great, I'd think fencing would be faster, but I don't know enough to say with any certainty.

 

[nismaratwork]

You're describing a prime parry at close distance that is finished with a flick. That type of action is classified as infighting. It is also significantly less common since 2005, but still happens often enough.

I do not believe this is a particularly fast maneuver, just surprising when well executed.

Yes, the blades people fence with in foil and saber are significantly lighter and more flexible than even the lightest dueling swords. In epee, they start to approach real values.


The weight difference is so great, I'd think fencing would be faster, but I don't know enough to say with any certainty.

Oh yes, it's not a very practical move, but I wasn't thinking of the overall maneuver, just the speed at the tip during the "flick".

 

[eroomynohtna]

Oh yes, it's not a very practical move, but I wasn't thinking of the overall maneuver, just the speed at the tip during the "flick".

It's practical enough. I do it myself. However, I have never been able to get a particularly strong flick out of it due to the fact that it's relying primarily on your forearm for power.

 

[Danger]

It's practical enough. I do it myself. However, I have never been able to get a particularly strong flick out of it due to the fact that it's relying primarily on your forearm for power.

I think that this is coming down to theory vs. practice. Those like you who have practical experience are far better qualified to expound upon the issue than is someone examining it on a computer or (more my speed) on paper. It's one thing to prove that something can be done, and quite another to actually do it.

 

[DaveC426913]

I think that this is coming down to theory vs. practice. Those like you who have practical experience are far better qualified to expound upon the issue than is someone examining it on a computer or (more my speed) on paper. It's one thing to prove that something can be done, and quite another to actually do it.

On the other hand, human experiences lie. It's one thing to think you've really done something, and another to take measurements to see if it really happened that way.

 

[nismaratwork]

Well, I haven't fenced for a decade, so I'm working on dim memories *dodder*. I mostly fenced saber anyway, but I have to agree with DaveC. There's a reason that professional fencers use biometric studies to improve their "game"... humans are just not built to accurately assess the speed of a thin bit of metal in the midst of an active sport. Eyewitness is not that useful in any circumstance when it comes to the details.

 

[Danger]

On the other hand, human experiences lie. It's one thing to think you've really done something, and another to take measurements to see if it really happened that way.

I have to agree with DaveC. There's a reason that professional fencers use biometric studies to improve their "game"... humans are just not built to accurately assess the speed of a thin bit of metal in the midst of an active sport. Eyewitness is not that useful in any circumstance when it comes to the details.

Which brings me back to my original point that instrumentation on or near the blade should be used to settle the matter. When I said "theory vs. practice", I meant that talking it out won't solve anything. Likewise, my suggestion that fencers have better idea of what happens than theoreticians wasn't meant to imply that they have definitive answers—merely that they know more through first-hand experience than does someone who has never held a sword. After all, we could talk about karate all day, but in the end I'll take the word of a black-belt over that of a kinesiologist whose only experience came from studying stick-men fighting on a computer monitor.

 

[DaveC426913]

After all, we could talk about karate all day, but in the end I'll take the word of a black-belt over that of a kinesiologist whose only experience came from studying stick-men fighting on a computer monitor.

I refer you back to the long-standing Martial Arts https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=201409" of PF yore. Martial artists had it all wrong, physicists won that one.

 

[Danger]

I refer you back to the long-standing Martial Arts https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=201409" of PF yore. Martial artists had it all wrong, physicists won that one.

Okay... I read the first page of that, and that was enough. Seems like a silly argument in the first place. I was always taught to aim for the back of the guy's head so my hand would be at maximum acceleration upon contact. Same idea as trying to put my cue into the rack on a pool break. (Ir)regardless, I concede your point in this matter. Don't get used to it, though.

 

[mugaliens]

The issue here is actually the speed of a fencing weapon. Can we save the gun-rights discussion for the politics forum?

Absolutely, Gokul, and no offense intended. :)

I think that this is coming down to theory vs. practice. Those like you who have practical experience are far better qualified to expound upon the issue than is someone examining it on a computer or (more my speed) on paper. It's one thing to prove that something can be done, and quite another to actually do it.

Multiple-angle strobe photography should be more than enough to verify or denounce claims with respect to tip speed. I've only twice witnessed fencing matches, but I never heard a crack. Just some stacatto clashes of steel and some high-speed swishes.

So, I just took a few moments and a 6' fiberglass bicycle flag (without the flag) I use for outdoor sports downstairs into the parking lot and gave it a few good swings.

I'm fairly strong, and have no trouble throwing my 100 lb son overhead for an hour in the pool, or connecting with 90 mph fastballs at the batting cage (though they're not much fun - 60 mph is more to my liking). Even with two hands, and all the force I could muster, still, nothing. Just swish, swish. I can also ring the bell 9 times out of ten at the amusement parks, so I do have both some pretty good upper body strength as well as enough practice splitting wood at my uncle's place to know how to use it. At least for splitting wood and hitting baseballs... (rolls eyes)

Back to physics...

Mathematically, a 6' pole swung in a circle comes to about 38' to 40', and with everything I can muster, I can't do it faster than about 1/4 of a second, which gives us a tip speed of, at best, 160 fps, or 110 mph.

That is nowhere close to 760 mph.

Part of the problem is the fact that a cylinder is horribly non-aerodynamic when compared to a thinner blade. Or for that matter, even a thicker, but more aerodynmic blade.

This negates the tapered cylinder of the foil, as well as well as the epee, which v-shaped. A sabre, on the other hand, still maintains an edge.

The question is whether that "edge" is enough, aerodynamically, in order to allow it to be swung fast enough for the tip to break the sound barrier?

In a straight swing, I just don't think there's any way to get anywhere close to mach. From 110 mph to 760 takes forty-seven times the power. Add mach drag rise effects and it's closer to 60 times the power.

But a straight swing isn't all that's out there.

The arm itself is somewhat shaped like a whip, thick at the shoulder and slender at the wrist, and segmented at several places, beginning, actually, in one's toes, and extending through the ankles, knees... Oh, you get the idea.

If the blade itself tapers and is flexible at the tip (which a saber is not), it's merely an extension of this effect. Swung in the right manner, particularly with a massive and powerful arm to initiate the initial momentum of the whip action, and the arm and the sword can impart a serious momentum to the tip, which, as you know, if light enough, might get close to or even break the barrier.

So, I just returned from downstairs again, with my trusty fiberglass whip, only after thinking about it I've modified my grasp to both impart more momentum (rather than pure velocity). Put simply, I choked up a bit on the "bat," about a third, and was swinging it down like an axe as is more my custom.

Still no crack, but the swishes were of somewhat higher pitch, which means greater tip velocity.

I understand the physics of it, but when it comes to fencing, there must be some sort of move designed to impart maximum energy to the weapon, perhaps as a coup de grai (sp)?

Still, with any sort of rigidity to the blade at all, even with the foil, I don't see how it's remotely possible for the tip velocity to exceed , at best, 250 fps.

Meanwhile, I've shot arrows using a compound bow which have been clocked at just over 300 fps, which given the arrows used, would cause much more damage than a slash with any of the three weapons used in fencing.

So... Mach? I'm sorry, but I just flat don't see out it could be done with any sword blad of any type.

However, I did think of a new type of blade which would do the trick: One that was metallic, about 12' long and segmentedly tapered to make it look like a whip, provided it's linear and total mass was about the same as that of most whips...

But that would be a metallic whip, not a sword, by definition.

 

[nismaratwork]

Absolutely, Gokul, and no offense intended. :)



Multiple-angle strobe photography should be more than enough to verify or denounce claims with respect to tip speed. I've only twice witnessed fencing matches, but I never heard a crack. Just some stacatto clashes of steel and some high-speed swishes.

So, I just took a few moments and a 6' fiberglass bicycle flag (without the flag) I use for outdoor sports downstairs into the parking lot and gave it a few good swings.

I'm fairly strong, and have no trouble throwing my 100 lb son overhead for an hour in the pool, or connecting with 90 mph fastballs at the batting cage (though they're not much fun - 60 mph is more to my liking). Even with two hands, and all the force I could muster, still, nothing. Just swish, swish. I can also ring the bell 9 times out of ten at the amusement parks, so I do have both some pretty good upper body strength as well as enough practice splitting wood at my uncle's place to know how to use it. At least for splitting wood and hitting baseballs... (rolls eyes)

Back to physics...

Mathematically, a 6' pole swung in a circle comes to about 38' to 40', and with everything I can muster, I can't do it faster than about 1/4 of a second, which gives us a tip speed of, at best, 160 fps, or 110 mph.

That is nowhere close to 760 mph.

Part of the problem is the fact that a cylinder is horribly non-aerodynamic when compared to a thinner blade. Or for that matter, even a thicker, but more aerodynmic blade.

This negates the tapered cylinder of the foil, as well as well as the epee, which v-shaped. A sabre, on the other hand, still maintains an edge.

The question is whether that "edge" is enough, aerodynamically, in order to allow it to be swung fast enough for the tip to break the sound barrier?

In a straight swing, I just don't think there's any way to get anywhere close to mach. From 110 mph to 760 takes forty-seven times the power. Add mach drag rise effects and it's closer to 60 times the power.

But a straight swing isn't all that's out there.

The arm itself is somewhat shaped like a whip, thick at the shoulder and slender at the wrist, and segmented at several places, beginning, actually, in one's toes, and extending through the ankles, knees... Oh, you get the idea.

If the blade itself tapers and is flexible at the tip (which a saber is not), it's merely an extension of this effect. Swung in the right manner, particularly with a massive and powerful arm to initiate the initial momentum of the whip action, and the arm and the sword can impart a serious momentum to the tip, which, as you know, if light enough, might get close to or even break the barrier.

So, I just returned from downstairs again, with my trusty fiberglass whip, only after thinking about it I've modified my grasp to both impart more momentum (rather than pure velocity). Put simply, I choked up a bit on the "bat," about a third, and was swinging it down like an axe as is more my custom.

Still no crack, but the swishes were of somewhat higher pitch, which means greater tip velocity.

I understand the physics of it, but when it comes to fencing, there must be some sort of move designed to impart maximum energy to the weapon, perhaps as a coup de grai (sp)?

Still, with any sort of rigidity to the blade at all, even with the foil, I don't see how it's remotely possible for the tip velocity to exceed , at best, 250 fps.

Meanwhile, I've shot arrows using a compound bow which have been clocked at just over 300 fps, which given the arrows used, would cause much more damage than a slash with any of the three weapons used in fencing.

So... Mach? I'm sorry, but I just flat don't see out it could be done with any sword blad of any type.

However, I did think of a new type of blade which would do the trick: One that was metallic, about 12' long and segmentedly tapered to make it look like a whip, provided it's linear and total mass was about the same as that of most whips...

But that would be a metallic whip, not a sword, by definition.

Generally speaking, the forward lunge is the maximum energy delivery mechanism, because you're putting the energy of your lunging body behind the blow. The thing is, fencing is really nothing at all like real sword-fighting, so there is no practical "killing" blow. With a slashing weapon such as a Kilij, Katana, or Saber, the main strikes are eightfold: vertical down and up, lateral across and back, and the 4 diagonals in between. A "Coup de grâce" (pronounced Koo day grahs) is traditionally delivered with the Main Gauche (a dagger), to the neck/spine, head, or heart. It was developed as a means to (relatively) humanely dispatch an opponent who was mortally wounded, but would not die quickly.

Finally, consider the difference (not superiority), between a piercing weapons such as a real rapier, a slashing weapon such as a Kilij, standard Longsword, or Katana, and a piercing projectile such as a hunting arrow. The former does it's damage when critical regions are struck, such as major blood vessels, the heart or throat. The second can sever limbs in a single blow, open the guts, or on other general way kill in one blow, and induce enormous shock and catastrophic blood loss. If you lip off an arm at the elbow, it's not as fancy as decapitation (which is certainly possible with such weapons), but the pain, and blood loss from the brachial artery and more is immensely effective.

Finally, the arrow, which has the benefits of the precision in a rapier, and in the case of a bladed head will cause a significant wound channel. However, a 300 fps bolt or arrow in the arm or thigh can be less than lethal... it is the range and aim which the bow affords making it so deadly. In terms of one shot, one kill, you can't beat cutting someone in half, but there is no weapon in the genealogy of European fencing which can do such a thing.

Hell, if you look at bullets, ignoring armor (as we are for the bladed weapons and bow), you don't want a super-fast round, but rather a Jacketed Hollow-Point round to mushroom and cause a large permanent cavity. Supersonic weapons are only useful if they are massive (tungsten rods from orbit), or meant to cause terror and pain, like a whip.