Vec001. The above hawk looks great. But in my opinion of a longer handle on the VTAC's is that it would hinder the performance of what they were designed to do. #1 for military use and possible close quarter combat and #2 throwing. I think the longer handle would get in the way.
right - key words are
"designed to do" - i have other designs on this ...uh ...
design.
humor me for a second, fellow-babies:
first a little bit about me:
i was trained by USMC and USN SEALs
(and others) -
extensively in CQB, with intense training in SCARS/SAFTA from Lew Hicks.
before that, and afterwards, (unfortunately) i had been in deadly experiences in CQB - more than one - and frankly, i think they taught me more than any leatherneck or frog ever did. - take that for what it is worth when reading what i am about to say
please.
....
i think if the close quarter combat comment was
true, you wouldn't see long weapons like the tomahawk in close combat throughout history, brother.
don't mean to shoot you down, but
the whole weapon is a weapon, not just the head. -
think of this as a night stick on steroids.
there are
corners on the strike plate that will lay open bone-backed flesh with a push
(think scalp - geysers of blood in the head, cheek bones, shin bones, under clavicles, brachial areas, ulnas, etc. - an endless list of proximal, devestating targets on the human body that can be disrupted with a shrug, not a giant sweep.)
i need to write up some curriculum obviously.
as to throwing, ...well ...i believe you have been correct, until the Gen 1's came along, at least - and the Gen 1's children designs will push back the envelope even more - you just
can't do things with wood and CGs that you
can do in composite - something the favorite monolithic composite handles
(a famous one being the VTAC) have not taken advantage of, being a homogenous handle.
the handle you see here on mine has voids and supportive masses that are placed for balance as well as strength. - i find that the more weight you can get near the ends
(equally) the faster turning the hawk will be, and easier to control.
(you would laugh, if you saw how much time i put into development of better handles every week.)
And a origional Lagana I would not touch.
i've never seen one yet, but i intend to at the first opportunity - at least Mr. LaGana was a
Thinking Man.
i'm sure you might agree.
Please dont get me wrong I think your work is great.
no, no - not at all, brother dust'...!
- i want to hear what people think.
right now i am trying to fight (at least) three common fallacies, that are reinforced by 500 years of hawk throwing experience...;
1) a long handle cannot throw as well as a short handle.
- completely false! - just
change the CGs...! - composites allow you to do that without weight increase and strength decrease
(- generally - you have to be good with composites and watch your continuous strand alignments, etc.).
2) longer is more detrimental in Close Quarter Battle.
completely false again...! i think the ideal length is the length of one's body in the longest dimension
when they are all balled up on the ground - it's just
one of those universal rules - try to find an adult that can get
smaller than 24 inches in any country in the world - they are rare. -
add that fact to some technique - and you are there! fellow-babies...!
3) VN style / spike hawks hawks are purely tactical.
Nonsense! that spike is invaluable for digging and using in primitive skills work.
again, it is all about what you know, and
defying expectation.
....defying expectation....
....let that thought sit there for a while....
....
....sure, ...make mine a
poll hawk as the Standard, ...but a spike hawk will do very well too, and
most polls are built wrong anyway -
we have to unlock folks from the NLP that has made them have pre-conceived notions about what their impliments can do.
that's the way i see it.
:thumbup:
Infact I have an order in with you. But I dont think everything needs a longer handle. If I do end up with a VTAC head only I will send it to you for the handle work..
Keep up the Great Lookin Work..
i don't think everything needs a longer handle either, and i am sorry if that is what folks have gotten from my commentaries.
the longer handle in the case of the VN speeds it up and lets you recover faster though, when you hold it tomahawk style
(where the last third of the handle meets the middle third), because of physics and the Gen 1 Contour, vice axe holding style
(at or near the end of the handle).
the longer handle also lets you use the spike to comfortable drag logs and lumber along with you
(or a body, in war), so you don't have to strain to pick it up, or use the edge of your main bit, ya dig...?
the longer handle also lets you deflect things easily when walking through boulders, for instance, and your reach is extended by the length of the haft.
(i do that all the time in some of my favorite remote hunting and primitve camping spots, through stream necks.)
the spike doesn't come back at your eyeball with a longer handle, when in gross-motor use (as in, panic) - it sails over the head and shoulders, even in the choked-up tomahawk hold.
a long handle makes a better splint.
....a better hammock pole.
a better tarp pole.
so you are right, not everything needs a long handle, but there is a short handle inside every one of my long handles,
...and there ain't one long handle in any short handle! ...
....
(but we are working on that.)
hoo-YAGHh.
good thread.
vec
