Armory Sponsor
Posted: 8/11/2007 12:13:48 AM EDT
|
Myself realizding that not every wound that is deadly will quickly stop an attacker, and vice versa, I have been wondering just really how effective a tomahawk blow to the head is? Take an Vietnam style american Tomahawk blow to the crown. W/ either end is is sure to be deadly, but will the blow really instantly kill a determined attacker? Or, would the attacker still have a few seconds of fight left in him before his brain swelled or whatever to where he passed out? Is it better to puncture w/ a spike or better to smash it? Which causes more rapid and debilitating brain trauma? It is better to smash the skull w/ a blunt edge or a smaller or larger hammer head? Is it better to actually penetrate the skull w/ the blow or to just strike it w/o caveing it in? Of course, lets also assume that we are talking about a non-helmuted head. All morbid musings I know, but the utility of a weapon is as a killing tool and I am just trying to well understand the physiology here? |
|
When something enters the skull at an angle that will impact the brain there is a lot of bad shit that happens. Bleeding, swelling and the worst are interrupted synapses. If you strike in the frontal lobe that deals with emotions and not motor functions the damage may not be enough to stop them instantly. If the attacker is on a drug such as PCP that effects the interior sections of the brain there may be some fight left. I personally think that a good penetrating strike to the brain will stop 99.99. DISCLAIMER! I am not a brain surgeon nor particularly knowledgable about that portion of the body. I know when I take just a good blow to the outside of my head things have a tendency to stop real fast. mainly from the pain and the whole tunnel vision thing. I suggest multiple strikes! |
Behind or in front? Tomahawk was mainly used a sneak weapon against sentries. Outside of warzone thats a murder charge. Puncture the lungs or heart they will drop, puncture the lungs and they will not be screaming for help. Your looking for the Occipital region or the spine, both of which are on the backside of the body. |
|
only a brain stem blow would cause immediate death. Very hard to get there from the top, if you could put the spike through the foramen magnum it would be like pulling the plug. Anything else to the head would be potentially incapacitating, but unpredictable. Any upper body shot would likely result in a fight and lots of noise, but depends upon the targets constitution, some people really are tougher than others. hope that helps |
What are ya gonna do, whack in the chest from the right and left with a tomahawk in each hand?  A puncture to the lung is by no means an instanly capacitating injury that will render someone silent or unable to still prosecute an attack when determined. People get shot, stabbed and receive blows to the chest(resulting in a popped lung) and can still fight. A pneumothorax is an injury that develops (depending on the size of the hole) over a period of minutes to hours. The end result that proves fatal when solely lung trauma is involved is a tension pneumothrax in which air escaping from the injured lung compresses the lung and heart and remaining lung mechanically preventing contraction and respiration. Unless you score a direct hit at some critical part of the brain or neck you can't say it will reliably stop an attacker or kill quickly. You certainly can't say that you can reliably cause a grievous enough vascular injury either. While waiting to bleed out one can fight tenaciously as well. On the other hand, just seeing an axe buried in their chest may be enough inspire an attacker to turn and run. |
|
I know that shooting animals in the head, think cows, can be very dangerous, b/c their brain isn't so big and if youu don't hit it they can flip out. W/ people, the brain is so large relative to the skull that any blow w/ a 3" spike will penetrate the brain. But my question is whether or not hitting any portion of the brain, or just some portions of the brain w/ a metal tit will cause instantaneoius death. A poster stated that only an attack to the brain stem is a sure thing. There is also anothe type of attack that will cause incapacitation with in two seconds, and that is blunt trauma. Once again this depneds on vectors, energy, frontal area etc. I blow to the side of the head near the temple can make a guy freeze and pass out if it is right. But is is better to pierce the skull near the temple or to produce blunt trauma? Sure penetrating the brain will cause damage, but it will also relieve pressure on the brain from bleed out that would otherwise brain swelling. |
|
I saw a lot of head injuries when I was an x-ray tech and I'm pretty sure there is no "failsafe" method of instant incapacitation with a weapon like a tomahawk. If you could sever the brain-stem or upper spinal cord they would drop like the proverbial sack of potatoes but that would not be a real easy feat unless they were totally un-aware of your intentions and perhaps lying on their stomach. I saw many gunshot wounds to the head survived, especially to the frontal and temporal lobes. I saw a few stabbings to the head, which pierced the skull survived, and a hatchet attack which looked gruesome but the lady survived and actually drives a car again. The most common lethal gunshot head-wounds I saw were self inflicted with .22lr's that were fired in classic fashion; right handed person places pistol to right temple just in front of the ear with the weapon actually pointing slightly upward and back so that it would be in line with the back of the opposite ear. The bullet would pass through the mid-brain, bounce off the opposite side like a cue ball and stop in the left parietal region of the brain. They would be deader than fried chicken. That is in great contrast to the shotgun under the chin trick which left a 18 yo boy fubar'ed but very much alive, or the .38 special lobotomies that end up being taken care of like babies. |
true: A clavicle fracture will end most fights as will most any fracture or dislocation involving bones bigger than fingers or toes. Most human beings don't tolerate extreme pain associated with fractures or major blunt trauma well at all. Seasoned fighters that have been exposed to pain are a different story, but even they can only take so much. You also have to figure in 'determination' , a theif will not very likely endure the pain a father would protecting a child. The shit you see in Hollyweird with people getting hit with crow-bars and baseball bats up side the head or across the back is BS, people are tough, but not that tough. The OP asked about an instant kill and I still contend that it is hard to do without practice. I remember some Ag students who were going to process a beef from start to finish who couldn't kill a calf at a distance of less than 5 feet, after several shots and much aggravation to the calf, the owner of the processing plant took the rifle and fired one shot and the calf's feet never moved, it just fell literally where it stood. The guy said he had done it over a thousand times and once you "get the feel for it" it's one shot, one kill. He had a mossberg, bolt action .22 and used shorts, he said they used to use a 3lb hammer but the .22 was better. |
I really appreciate that post. It is nice to hear from people w/ real world expereince instead of arm chair brain surgons like myself. Once again it looks like the brain stem/back of the head is money. |
The trick w/ the 3lb hammer is just to hit 'em square between the eyes right? I always wondered how you would get that shot in w/o scaring the cow. I guess you have to bring it right in its blind spot. Maybe a good design would be one w/ a blunt surface on it for a simple hammer blow to the head. If it takes a 3lb hammer to kill a steer maybe a 1lb would be enough for a man. It has to be quick though b/c combat is so much more dynamic than manual labor. |
Ok, now you're creeping me out. This is a defensive scenario....right? Are you planning a hatchet as your primary defense? How much close combat do you plan on doing? If you're thinking hatchet, why not a sword, or something that lets you maintain distance? Distance is your friend. Why allow them to get close to you? A gun says "back the fvck up" better than a hatchet ever would. Why the desire to close with your I think a tomahawk would be a great weapon for use as Native Americans used them. In a charge, with speed, surprise and violence of action on your side. If you plan on squaring off against someone with your battle axe any injury you can inflict will involve you raising your arm to attain max velocity and speed in an attempt to most likely deliver a downward blow. Thus you're opening your chest,abdomen, torso to stabbing or a charge to get you to the ground. Also, a tomahawk being just a tomahawk means you really only have just the ability to swing with the hopes of delivering the crushing below you are planning. With a knife merely holding it in your outstretched arm you can keep someone back, you can deliver penetrating trauma, slash cutting major muscle groups and soft tissues like the neck a la OJ Simpson and his ex's new boyfriend. I think there are better choices out there dude. |
|
"Alden attempted to escape from the Wells house He was chased down a road for some distance by an Indian. Brant repeatedly shouted for his surrender. Alden refused, making a fatal mistake by stopping, turning and firing his pistol repeatedly at Brant. His powder was wet, and the pistol misfired each time. Finally, the Mohawk chief hurled his tomahawk hitting Alden in the head, killing him instantly." |
Mel gibson was also a bad-ass tomahawk weilder in "the patriot" , I think. I'll take my H&K over a tomahawk any day. |
So your going to compare that Bark Maker quasi trained actor to an actual person who actually killed people with tomahawks? Of course Im going to choose my 1911 over my Flintlock pistol even if it is 58 cal |
I wonder if it was a blade or a big-ass rock on that there tomahawk. Depends on the date I suppose. Blunt trauma with a heavy object(like a rock) would be more deadly than a penetrating wound by a lighter object (like a blade)The natives were using rock until we arrived with blade technology, and "killing him instantly" may be a little use of artistic license. I bet he twitched a little. 
|
The events in question happened in Nov of 1778 in Cherry Valley New York. It was an Iron with a steel bit pipe tomahawk. |
Very Funny dude. No I am not planning on getting in alot of CQB and the scenario I imagine is as a side arm in the even that a long gon fails to function or a hand gun fails to stop the opponant before he gets to you. There are operators who carry La Guna type Hawks into the theater. They are part utility tool, part brain smasher in case someone gets too close I guess. Plus those throw and stick pretty well, whatever that's worth. If a guy is with in the 7yrd ish zone and your rifle fails or you don't already have your handgun aimed on him you had better draw your knife or do some strong movement to put something between he and you b/c hand gun wounds, unless to the head and even sometimes to the head, are not so good at stopping attackers (though they are likeley to be lethal eventually). The thought here is that in the modern day melee his, as a compact and single hand weapon, might be a good side arm. But as you were saying, maybe a knife would be better b/c knives don't require a back swing and make a better guard b/c they can be brought back to a threatening position between you and him more quickly than even a light hawk. You are also right that a sword would be better. YOu could either be using a short naval type cutlass or a longer saber type or some sort of two handed sword. I am not contemplating these so much b/c I am trying to think of a weapon that is a side arm to a fire arm and that could be worn most all day w/o too much trouble and could go in and out of vehicles and corridors w/ you easily enough. It wouldn't necessarily have to be completely comfortable for dismounted mobilization, but mostly just compact enough for a SWAT type operator. but i digress... The main thing I am trying to figure out right now is what is the best type of head to have on a hawk of the three options: Spike, Axe Edge, or Hammer face. We are talking about something is the 12-16" OAL range w/ a head approximately 12+ oz. What would be the best thing to have on there to stop a non-helmuted man fastest. Could respondants list them in order from fastest to slowest at stopping an attacker. axe bit, hammer face, 2-4" skpke??? granted you might could have 2 out of three, so which two would you want to have on your hawk, or just one, and why. |
Yes an indian war club type weapon is quite deadly, but the problem is in being able to land one on him before he moves out, or moves in w/ a nimbler weapon and takes you. If that's what both guys have than it is a wash, but against a nimble two handed sword a base ball bat, indian wor club, axe etc is just too ponderous for duel style combat. These things were used for lack of availability of swords or as special purpose weapons in organized combaned arms tactics. |
| rightwingnut? boy thats a good one,Paladin has a tomahawk book out its good.When I ordered James Keating's Tomahawk Vid I called on a Sat. on the off chance someone would be there to take my order? Suprised the shit outa me someone answered the phone sounded familiar,I had some of his Bowie tapes already, damned if it wasn't the MAN himself ,we chated for awhile he recommended a solid metal hawk with a spike. Said that the wood handled ones heads sometimes slip down the handle if short handed to use for a strike . The vid has a lot of stuff on it you want the secound one the first one is more for reinactors. Training stuff on vid too. Hope this helps. |
I think we need to define things a little better. Spike hawks do not come into the indian trade until way beyond the time when armor was being worn, so I dont think your idea has merit. Many Spike hawks had spikes that were not on the same horizontal plane as the ax blade, making them useless for combat, but very good for root digging. IE a spike that was curved downward, pointing at the users hand almost But to me a Tomahawk is an ax made for trade with Natives here in North America. I have not made a study of European war axes from before the age of gunpowder so you might be correct and this is just a terminology "Argument" |
| Europe had battle axes that were small single hand weapons used in combination w/ a shield. There were also ones that were special made for throwing and had a point on the bottom and top of the handle as well as two axe bits. There were also swinging weapons w/ spikes made to pierce plate armor, but I didn't think that they were one hand weapons, b/c again, not only do you need alot of power to penetrate but it is usually difficult to get it back out again with a single hand. |
Why carry the extra weight of something you will probably never use? A sheath knife at least has many other uses besides skewering an opponent.Better yet a sharpened E-tool.You can dig holes,dig up roots for food,a good one is a remarkably good chopper and you can build a shelter or cut up firewood.For hand to hand you can use the flat for blunt trauma easily capable of breaking bone or as a small shield,the edge for slicing,you can hook an opponents extremities with the step of the shovel,and you have a considerable reach advantage over even the largest sheath knife.Not tacticool i know but a FAR more capable and flexible tool. A Swiss surplus E-tool.Superb and far sturdier than the Cold Steel version,set me back $10. |
| I would carry a poll-ax , in your case the traditional English trade axe with a hammer-head on the back , with an 18" handle , similiar to the belt-axe issued to British infantry during the American Revolutionary War . The longer handle gives a mechanical advantage without adding weight . It would add the versatility of a hammer , it could also be used to stun , the edge could be used to kill , although hammers have been used successfully as lethal weapons ... In the evolution of the trade axe , the spike appears on early samples , and gradually gets smaller until it replaced by the pipe-bowl or hammer-poll , although there are contemporary spike-head examples ... I have carried tomahawks , growing up , in the Boy Scouts , and also as a reenactor . A spike can be dangerous to the wearer , unless you sheath it , then you lose speed on the draw .Throwing an axe in battle is like throwing a knife , you've possibly disarmed yourself , and if you missed , you possibly gave your enemy the advantage . Throwing knives and axes in camp , however , is good sport ... Incidently , "tomahawk" is Algonquin for war-club , I just used 'axe ' because its easier to type ... |
|
You only throw a weapon in combat w/ the expectation that it will ive you a momentary advantage in which to close and kill w/ your other weapon. You might get lucky and incapacite him, but you can't plan on it. You might stun him, injur his leg or limit his mobility, temporarily or more, or take his balance or cause him to trip etc. In fact, you don't even have to hit him to do some of this, and in the terrain of your encounter, it might give you an opening, but still, it can be risky. But at least you have the option. Hell, sometimes people throw their swords in a duel. I am leaning more towards the axe blade on one side w/ hammer face on the other for reasons of utility and combat both. If you want to inporve your thowability, I would add an upswept spike to the rear like on that gay SOG thowing hawk. |
The entrenching tool has been used as far back as the early 1900s as a defensive weapon. It was widely accepted for the Panzertruppen during the Russian campaign to sharpen and practice with their e-tools, this practice was picked up by the Russian Spetsnaz and Naval Infantry and still practiced today. |
| IIRC, entrenching tools were rather useful in the trench warfare in WWI. One of the blows that was used was one to the underside of the chin using the sharpened front edge of the shovel. Also a slashing blow to the shoulder at the neck was usually deemed sufficient to incapacitate your opponent. Then again, a good smack in the nose with the flat of the shovel could prove interesting also. Damned useful those e-tools. |
|
I wonder about the useful ness of a non solid shovel like the glock shovel or the gerber shovel Gerber Shovel |
|
Ah go for the face and hands when oppents throws them up to block aim for the joints more damage and easier to cut through the streched tendons. But thats just advice I got on knife fighting from an old SEAL. According to him most people will give up the fight at the sight of their fingers seperated from their hands. |
Armory Sponsor