39

In the anime RWBY most characters have crazy weapons with multiple forms, like a scythe, that’s also a gun, or a gauntlet, that’s also a gun or a sword, that’s also a scythe AND a gun!

But the weapon I find the most fascinating is a bow that's also two one-handed swords.

I was wondering if it is possible to create a bow that can be reassembled, so that you would get two one-handed swords.

Things I think about that might be difficult:

  • A bow has to be able to bend quite a lot to allow to pull the string and make your arrow fly. What material could allow swords to bend enough to make them a viable component of the bow?

  • How fast could you switch between the weapon-types? Would you be able to quickly make two swords to fight in melee combat if someone is running towards you?

  • Where do you store your arrows? They should be easily accessible but at the same time not prevent you from fighting with the swords.

  • How much would this bow weigh? The swords need a certain weigh for melee combat, but they shouldn’t be too heavy, as you have to wield two of them.

  • Where do you attach the string?

Of course in the anime the "rule of cool" applies to a lot of things, but would you actually be able to fight with such a weapon?

Because of all these problems I came up with this question:

Can you create such a weapon with current day technology? And if you can create such a weapon: How would you realistically create a bow that can be reassembled so that you can fight with two one-handed swords?

Secespitus
  • 17,743
  • 9
  • 75
  • 111
  • 32
    Any sword-bow you could come up with is going to be a sub-optimal sword AND a sub-optimal bow. It's simply impossible to get the best of both worlds. – Shufflepants Mar 09 '17 at 14:50
  • 1
    @Aify wrote up a good answer. I would just mention that for someone to be a master swordmaker the test is pretty elaborate and includes the sword tip being able to bend to 45* and return...so steel would would just fine for this effort if properly heat treated. That said normally on a sword the cutting edge is left hard while the spine is heated to soften it and give it flexibility...for this to work regularly as a bow the cutting edge would have to be softer meaning it would dent much easier... – James Mar 09 '17 at 17:15
  • 3
    The only reason to combine weapons like this is the "cool" factor. You lose out on a lot by trying to shoehorn two weapons into one. – Marshall Tigerus Mar 09 '17 at 17:44
  • 2
    Pit (Kid Icarus) is who came to mind with a bow-swords hybrid for me. Unfortunately his works by the blessing of a Goddess, so not very applicable... – CAD97 Mar 09 '17 at 19:14
  • 5
  • Something like this or this? – algiogia Mar 09 '17 at 22:30
  • 1
    My answer for gun-sword applies exactly to your post too. Just another “app” in the mech-all. – JDługosz Mar 10 '17 at 08:38
  • 1
    Don't have time for a full answer but...consider using a Compound Bow model, instead of a longbow model. Compound Bows have metal, rigid arms...all the pull comes from the pulley system, not from the arms bending. In this way, you could keep the relative rigidity of the blades and not need to flex them constantly, while still having a high draw-weight bow. – guildsbounty Mar 10 '17 at 18:44
  • I am reminded of Simon's Bowblade from Bloodborne. – Jonathan Mar 16 '17 at 00:02
  • If you put the string on a compound bow mechanism that only has one string, it is more likely that it would work with the mechanism always trying to make the string as tight as it can but also allowing someone to pull it back. The only problem would be fitting the whole mechanism into the sword and giving the tensile strength to cut through anything other than metal. – Mike Mar 27 '20 at 04:48

17 Answers17

43

Is it possible? Yes, but not the way you think it will be.

Theoretically, you could create the weapon you're describing by designing a "hybrid" weapon.

We can avoid some of the things you think are difficult by designing the weapon as such:

    /|  |\       /| and |\ represent the two blades of sword
    ||[]||       ||     ||
    ||[]||
    ||[]||       - Sword sections are actually 2 outer normal blades
    ||[]||       - Middle section of sword "[]" is one limb of a bow.
    ||[]||       - "M"s represent a locking mechanism in the hilts to allow
    ||[]||         the joining of the two swords into a single bow
    ||[]||       - Hilt and guard of the sword are normal
    ||[]||       - String can be attached through top of limb
    ||[]||       
    ||[]||
    ||[]||
    ||[]||
|============|  <--- guard
      {}
      {}
      {}
      {}
     WWWW   <------ Stores arrows
     MMMM  <------ Connecting spot, doubles as potential arrow rest
     WWWW  
      {}
      {}          
      {}     
      {}     
|============|  <--- guard
    ||[]||
    ||[]||
    ||[]||
    ||[]||
    ||[]||       
    ||[]||        
    ||[]||       
    ||[]||      
    ||[]||     
    ||[]||   
    ||[]||    
    ||[]||      
    \|  |/

String can be designed to be stored INSIDE the limb of the bow pulled out and connected together, like so:

    -------------[Locking mechanism][Locking mechanism]-------------
       ^
     String

Basically, to answer your points:

  • The sword parts don't bend (when pulling on the bowstring) - only the center, the limb part of the sword bends
  • Assuming you designed the hilt locking mechanism properly, you could simply twist the swords 180 degrees to unlock and create 2 swords.
  • This weapon shouldn't weigh much more than a normal sword. The limb used in the center of the weapon should overall cause the sword to be lighter than normal, since a large chunk of the metal will be gone.
  • Done properly, you would be able to store 1 or 2 folding arrows in each hilt section. Carving out a section of the handle and hiding it in there is also an option.
  • String attaches via Limbs

Would you be able to fight with this weapon? Yes, however there are some important things to note.

Note 1: Limited ammunition with regards to shooting arrows. Severely so, unless you carry extra arrows on a belt or something.

Note 2: Some fighting styles use the flat of the blade to block blows - this will damage your bow, and generally it's a bad idea to block with the edge of the blade as well, which means the defensive component of the fighting style of this sword user will likely need to be dodging and positioning based rather than parry based.

Note 3: This weapon does not make a good stabbing weapon. Slashing only please - curved blades can help with this.

Note 4: The bow mode won't look like a bow until you pull back the string, due to the way the string is notched and rests along the sword. It may end up looking like this from the side when pulled.

  | /!
  |/   !               | represents the blade
<-------!              ! represents string
  |\   !             <------ represents arrow
  | \!

  Note that since the middle of the blade is the limb, when firing as a bow
  the flat of the blades will be facing towards you and the target. It 
  should look almost like a + shape when taking the guard into account.

Note 4: The string can lock using a similar twist and turn mechanism, which can double as an easy arrow nocking point.

Note 5: When using this in bow mode, your hand will likely be holding the bottom handle, since the middle section is where your arrow rest will be.

Note 6: This sword/bow hybrid is not going to be as good a sword or as good a bow when compared to a normal sword or bow. It is simply impossible to get the best of both worlds in a single weapon.

ALTERNATIVE METHOD:

You can use a double scimitar, and simply design the tip of the scimitar to allow string threading.

The sword still won't bend, however - instead, you'd want to put some springs between the guard of the sword and the hilt. This allows, when the swords are put together, for the springs to provide the power and the sword blades to become the limbs of the sword, almost like how a power spring bow would work.

However, you may have some issues with slashing depending on how stiff the springs are.

This method also doesn't seem as cool/original.

Aify
  • 18,987
  • 11
  • 65
  • 96
13

The flexibility of the swords is no problem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4pxLGEXimo

You just have to build a small block in which you can stick the tips of the swords and add a small nudge to the sword-handles to hold the bowstring. The block will function as a handle for the bow. The bowstring will push the sword tips into the bow handle. The second you remove (if time is of the essence cut) the string, the whole thing will come apart and you have two swords.

For the storage of the arrows, I recommend a standard quiver.

Till
  • 1,465
  • 1
  • 9
  • 18
  • 6
    Careful with what you are comparing. Flexibility detracts from both cutting and thrusting qualities. Modern sword replicas are incredibly flexible for either safety or simple lack of knowledge on how to build functional swords. – Faerindel Mar 09 '17 at 11:30
  • 3
    @Faerindel can you source your statement? My understanding is that quality steel swords can have a large amount of flexibility and that it only enhances their cutting ability (since a stiff sword may snap). – Jason K Mar 09 '17 at 15:44
  • Maybe have exaggerated a bit. Indeed, a sword needs flexibility to not snap. However, too much, to even become 'wobbly', and it will require harder to deal good cuts. And you definitely want a stiff blade when thrusting into something. As for sources, I can give you a sword collector and hema instructor: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GuZwgqI06Qk – Faerindel Mar 09 '17 at 16:38
  • 2
    How "wobbly" are we speaking here? Take the biggest piece from leaf spring, is it too wobbly for a sword? It's definitely OK for a bow. – Daerdemandt Mar 09 '17 at 22:17
  • 8
    @Faerindel A bow doesn't want to be wobbly at all. If it's wobbly, it's got no power at all. All the energy going into the arrow comes from forcing a stiff material to bend, without breaking. Modern bow limbs are in fact many times stiffer than sword steel. A modern compound at ~70 pounds draw weight will have ~2" limb deflection at full draw. – Leliel Mar 10 '17 at 01:09
  • 2
    Since the handle of the sword is quite heavy, especially when compared to an arrow, having the sword handles be the outer end of your bow limb would result in a non functional bow. The arrow would barely be able to fly 5 meters (15 feet), if it would even manage to reach that distance. – Jacco Mar 11 '17 at 14:38
  • @Faerindel, the stiffer sword he shows in that video, and says it's his stiffest one, seems about right stiffness for a longbow. – Jan Hudec Mar 11 '17 at 20:56
8

To start with: I don't think it is feasible to make a weapon like this that can be used in a fight. As a display weapon however, any of the other answers would probably work.

Something to take into account is the incredible amount of force that acts on various parts of a bow to fire an arrow. I don't have math to back this up but I do DO archery - something that can absolutely destroy any bow is to "dry fire" it. That is - to draw the string and release without nocking an arrow. There is no resistance against the string in this case and it can BADLY damage the bow to even do this once. I think that the force of swinging swords against stuff would probably mimic damage similar to this. I will say however that since they would be probably made of metal or other "stronger" material than laminated fiberglass and wood, then they may survive this better than a normal bow-limb would.

Running with the idea anyways: Regarding disassembly, there are plenty of bows that are intended to disassemble. They are typically made of three sections: two limbs and a handle-section.

(the black piece in this image is a stabilizer that is unnecessary to have) http://www.bestrecurvebowguide.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Take-Down-Recurve-Bow.jpg

When the bow is strung, the curve in the limbs is actually flipped around such that they are curved in the OTHER direction - this is what allows them to "snap" and fling the arrow effectively. More traditional-style bows do use straighter limbs, however I do not think that they shot as far or as accurately.

The feasibility of this sword-bow will also be dictated by how effective you want the bow portion to be. Do you want to be able to hunt with it and hit a small spot on a moving target (ie. a kill-shot)? Or do you simply want to be able to fire an arrow in the "general direction" of a target?

If you want any measure of accuracy, then the limbs must not have any "twist" in them, and there must be no variance in how the bow portion is constructed each time. For example: a handle sliding together together to grasp the limb portions by the hilts as others have suggested MUST lock into place at the exact same spot every time. The string cannot vary in length or twist either. (Bowstrings are composed of several strands that have been joined into loops at the ends and twisted down the middle. More twist means a shorter string and more "shooting force" and a short string forces the limbs to bend more.)

Furthermore, unless you are assuming a "very good or above" level of archer, then there are other "must haves" on a bow to allow/help with repeatable shot placement and reasonable aim: a reliable shooting platform ("arrow rest"), a string that only fits on the bow in one direction (ie. it cannot be flipped upside-down) as there is a "nock-point" that should be attached to the string to enable consistent arrow placement every time. This nock-point is not centered (it is close however) but is positioned according to the arrow-rest so that the arrow shoots straight.

Perhaps the string could be stored inside the handle section on a spring-loaded roll. One end would be fixed to the handle and the other end could be pulled to run the string up the front of the sword-limbs (and sit in a groove to stay centered on them) and then down the backside of the bow to hook into a notch on the bottom sword-bow-limb. (The string would be attached in the middle to the front of the bow handle and looped over the bottom bow limb as a normal bowstring would be.) That would at least handle the string issue and keep a nock-point in the same place every time.

If the user were to carry a middle-section to join the sword-limbs to, then that could potentially also work and would take care of the arrow-rest portion. It might take a few moments to switch from one form to another however so it probably would not work in combat.

You would have to carry a quiver of arrows, although some quivers do actually mount to the side of the handle-section of a bow to store 3-5 arrows by clipping them into place.

BunnyKnitter
  • 261
  • 1
  • 5
  • Your "unless you are assuming a "godly" level of archer" lists requirements that traditional bows (in the European sense of the term) do not have. A traditional English longbow, for example, does not have an arrow rest, nor is the string have a nocking-point, or anything else to help the archer for that matter. – Jacco Mar 10 '17 at 17:34
  • hmm... I have no experience with that kind of bow. Are they accurate enough with the practice and experience an average soldier/user-in-battle would have to be usable to hit a kill shot on a moving target? I know the nock-point and arrow rest as components that allow a consistent/repeatable arrow-placement and thus DRASTICALLY increase the ability to aim. – BunnyKnitter Mar 10 '17 at 17:49
  • 1
    [1/2] English longbows took considerable training to use effectively in battle (in part due their high draw weight). I shoot an historic eastern recurve bow myself, with the arrow resting on my index finger and no nockingpoint (safe the visible discoloring of the string after shooting with somewhat muddy arrows) and I can hit the target just fine up to 70m or so (the 90 meter targets are hard). – Jacco Mar 10 '17 at 18:04
  • 1
    [2/2] I think practice and familiarity with your equipment goes a long way to compensate for the lack of features that come standard on modern-day bows); I find I nowadays shoot more on intuition than on actual precision aiming, as I used to do with the olympic-class recurve bows. – Jacco Mar 10 '17 at 18:05
  • I'll edit that then. I always thought that the English longbows were more used to fire masses of arrows in the general direction of an opposing army and less to actually "aim" at stuff. – BunnyKnitter Mar 10 '17 at 18:46
  • English longbowmen actually had "godly" levels of archery skill. Every Englishman was required by law to practice archery regularly, and they could field an enormous number of extremely effective archers. – Gryphon Mar 30 '17 at 06:04
6

These steps may help (no numbers provided):

  1. Engineer your blade so that it is stiff when loaded from the front and it bends when loaded from the sides (carbon fibers can be used to increase anisothropic behavior and also keep the weight under control). In this way you can still chop your enemy by having a stiff blade, but if you try to hit your enemy with the side of the blade he will simply be hit by a "wobbling stick".
  2. Join the two blades by the handles, and pull a "string" between their other ends. Since the handle is the place where you have maximum load when you pull your bow, you can't rely on something flimsy to hold the swords in place.

If the bonding is made with some "quick release" mechanism, you can assemble and release the weapon within seconds. Removing the string may add some time to the action. You will need proper maintainance to the quick release, so that it operates as intended.

L.Dutch
  • 286,075
  • 58
  • 587
  • 1,230
  • Most (all?) swords do this, more or less. No need for advanced materials or engineering. Also, you don't want it too "wobbly", because then it will have no bow strength.
  • – Adeptus Mar 10 '17 at 07:11
  • During degradation of an official it was common to break his sword by forcing it on its sides (http://www.newyorker.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/090928_r18848_p646-848x1200-1455052584.jpg). That can happen with a material which is not elastic enough, and when you pull a bow you are going to be in that range of stress. – L.Dutch Mar 10 '17 at 07:16