If we compare the height difference in the field frames of the Orsova artifacts and the ones from Elenovo, the following becomes apparent:

Height of Orsova field frame:  14.3 inches

Height of Elenovo field frame:  10.43 inches

Therefore we might suspect that all the other major dimensions on the Elenovo machine are reduced in size from the Orsova machine by a factor of roughly seven tenths.  (.729 to be precise)

Using this ratio of .729,  Firefly’s 30.5 inch limbs would be reduced in size down to 22  1/4 inches.  The distance between the center of the spring holes in the field frames would go from 57 inches on Firefly, down to 41  1/2 inches on Phoenix.

If we look at the spring hole diameters we see the following:

Orsova machine:  3.110 inches.

Elenovo machine:  2.632 inches.

Here the ratio is .846.   Which, proportionally, gives us a bit more spring diameter to work with on Phoenix.  I do not think a comparison of the spring holes in the Orsova and Elenovo artifacts is as good a reference for figuring a reduction ratio for the rest of the machine, as is comparing the relative height of the field frames.  The  size of the spring hole can be affected by everything, from the catapult maker’s ballistic ambitions to a need for clearance around the spring to counter chaffing issues on it’s delicate fibers.  On the other hand, the height of the field frames seems a more fixed reference when considering scale. And so, when she is finished, I fully expect Phoenix to be about seven tenths the size of Firefly and have springs trending fat rather than skinny.  That’ll make her fit right in around here.

For modern man, chasing the ephemera of ancient catapult technology is not unlike that carnival act with the shells and the pea.  You never quite know where you are until you flip the walnut shell or pull the firing lanyard.

Cutting steel for the field frames commences tomorrow.

 

Leave a Reply