PDA

View Full Version : Unexpected blade break caught on vid



Darth Viox
06-02-2008, 07:20 PM
I was pretty dumbfounded when it happened, but during a choreography sequence where i let a friend use my saber to practice their scene for an upcoming event, my blade just snapped, there was no shatter, no shards flying anywhere or blade soaring in the air, it just simply snapped inside my emitter...

One hell of a clean break too, i can put the pieces together and they fit like legos.

I use my saber a lot, pretty much every wednesday from 6pm to 11pm i fight with it against Bamboo Shinai + other customized bamboo weapons and the rare TCSS Vs TCSS Saber opponent.

Blade was a full 40" long
Screw on LED blade holder style 3
Double threaded hilt style 4
MHS ribbed extension
the old version of the MPS Pommel style 4

heres the video (had to insert music due to my cursing)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGKA8_b6Nho

heres the pieces that broke
http://i207.photobucket.com/albums/bb292/HoodooVoodooMan/starwars/Break1.jpg
http://i207.photobucket.com/albums/bb292/HoodooVoodooMan/starwars/Break2.jpg
http://i207.photobucket.com/albums/bb292/HoodooVoodooMan/starwars/Reunited.jpg

Dark Navel
06-02-2008, 07:57 PM
Rare to see a thick blade like that break but I think you had two things going against you here. It looks like less than 2" were inside your hilt (I may be wrong but that's what it looks like) and then you had 40" inches extending out...I know the blades don't weigh much but the amount of weight over 40" was pretty much right where the blade met the top of the emitter. Over time, with constant battling, you must have created a stress crack in the ployc and it was just aching to snap at it's weakest point.

Zero Unit
06-02-2008, 07:58 PM
Wow...

Perhaps the blade is still usable if you grind it flat on the broken end, yes?

xwingband
06-02-2008, 08:05 PM
Yeah, that wasn't too hard. Just stress from extended use. Pretty cool to say you did it though!

Darth Viox
06-02-2008, 10:23 PM
Wow...

Perhaps the blade is still usable if you grind it flat on the broken end, yes?

yeah i've already cut and sanded the blade flat, this Wednesday will be the first time fighting again, so we'll see what else happens lol.

Eandori
06-03-2008, 03:27 AM
Wow! I've never seen or heard of a thick walled blade breaking! Good thing they are cheap to replace!

40" of blade is VERY long for luxeon. Luxeon really gets better the shorter it is, I prefer my blades to be between 30" viewable to 32" viewable. I also REALLY prefer thin walled blades. This is after using a 34" thick walled also, I found the saber was MUCH easier to swing and the center of gravity was deeper into the hilt with the light setup. I could even dual with one hand easily where with the thick walled I needed 2 to be fast at dueling.

Remember... lightsabers are supposed to be weightless blades. If you want to choreograph a really killer battle, I don't think it will look proper when each of you is obviously putting much effort into the actual swinging of the blades. Just take another quick look at the saber battle between Anakin and Obi-Wan in EP III. Very quick, very light blades.

Just make sure both you and your friends have thin walled if that's what you go to them. A thin walled blade would get damaged after fighting a thick walled if hit hard enough. But thin vs thin seems to be the special sauce. :)

Darth Viox
06-03-2008, 03:19 PM
well the problem with that thin vs thin special sauce is that we're all Saber owners in the Jack of all Trades sense.

We not only do Choreography, but we really do fight with them, no pre planned fight sequence, just skill vs skill and at times we even go up against some intimidating weapons such as this Pole Arm I made that sports an impressive 9 1/2 ft long with nearly a 4 ft long blade
http://i207.photobucket.com/albums/bb292/HoodooVoodooMan/Shinai/Polearm2.jpg
http://i207.photobucket.com/albums/bb292/HoodooVoodooMan/Shinai/Polearm1.jpg

Other weapons are either two planked or four planked Bamboo Shinai and then in some cases a fellow TCSS Saber is used.

as it is in fights regarding skill vs skill my blade is evened out by the weight of my hilt due to metal weight, electronics weight, and foam insulation, so i can swing it fairly quickly with no effort, so in the respects of fighting saber vs saber and or a weapon of equal size, my saber has no problem at all in the speed dept.

Really the TCSS Blade IS the jack of all trades.

Coming up tomorrow I'll be recording some demos of what we do and the performance of a TCSS Blade vs it's equal and others.

But as far as the video i posted, that wasn't even full speed we were in the middle of planning stages for the scene we're going to do which is why it came as a huge shock, when we do choreography we don't just twirl for shiny sake, we HIT!

*edit*
Another reason why i don't like thin walled blades is because of the way they flex, theres very little control and stability, at times it looks like i'm fighting with rope light...

Novastar
06-03-2008, 08:17 PM
Thick-walled blades do indeed break.

BOP I and BOP II used thick-walled blades 100% of the time, and... yup: during some rehearsals, some blades got their arses handed to them. Granted--most of those breaks (but not all) were usually involving the first 1 to 7 inches nearest the tip. One or two were pretty severe fractures that kinda "split the blade vertically" a bit...

Now... for BOP III--we were attempting thin-walled blades... and... I'm SURPRISED to say that (for the short period of time we were rehearsing with the partial cast for BOP III)... only a SINGLE blade broke during rehearsals!

In fact--the "main" two blades (used for the "250 Battle" available on the CF Sound Compendium CD)... never broke. And I estimated that each saber blade has gone through 24,000+ hits. Those are the Flange III sabers, and have been used for MORE than just the BOP III rehearsals as well.

So 24,000 is being quite conservative with the hit count! :)

But... all things are destroyed with time. :) Even mountains.

goldsaberwarrior
06-04-2008, 04:03 AM
That's a new one on me too. I have to agree that the way you were using the saber caused a stress point to form and the blade snapped.

Eandori
06-04-2008, 08:58 AM
If you are stuck on using thick walled blades... you can still make them MUCH stronger by shortening them. I can promise that a 32" thick walled blade is FAR more sturdy then a 40" thick walled blade. Since you are using luxeon technology too... it will also be brighter and more evenly lit.

Darth Viox
06-04-2008, 12:46 PM
Well naturally a shorter blade would be stronger, however you're also losing a lot of advantages and have just turned a saber into a twirly twirl baton.

don't get me wrong 32" is just fine and dandy... for Choreography fan film work...

The way our system works is on a 2 point system, so 2 points and you're out of the fight.
Torso is 2 points thats Chest, Abdomen, Sides, Back, & Buttocks.
Arms above the elbow and legs are worth 1 point.

So you either have to hit both arms or legs or the combo of the two, or get a straight shot to the torso.

Now using a 32" blade would mean your blade is solid but you leave little space for attack and defense, it's no better than a light stick at that point, the reason and purpose for having atleast 36" is that 36" is considered the neutral length for a bladed weapon, your attack space is just as even as your defensive space but going against a longer bladed weapon will mean you have to work harder to kill and just as hard to defend.

BUT a 32" blade leaves little to work with for attack and defense a 38" blade can lash out and tag your chest with no effort and you'd be swinging at the air because the opponent can keep his or her distance due to the advantage.

This also comes in handy too while dealing in choreography, when i see fights where one person clearly has the advantage, blade wise, it bugs the hell out of me that the Choreography director didn't fix the problem with the fight scene, so pretty much it's long blade and short blade twirling a lot then the occasional hit and then back to twirling, which might i add watching a 32" blade take a low swing at a longer bladed opponent is funny, because the person jumps... and in my mind it's... "Jump and land your blade down on their shoulder..." but that just doesn't happen.

any way that was slightly off topic.

32 inches is sturdy but does not look great and takes away from the function ability of the saber UNLESS you are using two single handed sabers with 32" blades then the advantage is boosted because you now have more to work with.

Personally 36 would be the shortest i'd consider, it's as i said before the neutral length for a saber, great stability and does not nerf your combat and defense.

after tonight i'll submit a video, none of it is choreographed.

Malaki Skywalker
06-04-2008, 01:10 PM
32" is far too short, i've fought people with 32" blades before, and they do not last long.


as it is my blade is now slightly under 38 1/2" long so tonight i'll be recording how it handles.


32" is fine for choreo fights where the winner is planned ahead of time, but in a real fight where skill determines the winner, 32" is asking to get your butt kicked.

after tonight i'll submit a video.

Just remember the movie accurate blade size is 34-36", plus I'm always owning people with Infurous, and its a 32" Erv' style blade :mrgreen:

Darth Viox
06-04-2008, 01:15 PM
plus I'm always owning people with Infurous, and its a 32" Erv' style blade :mrgreen:

lol you must have some unique fight style, i've never been beaten with anything shorter than a 36" :lol:

Voice
06-04-2008, 01:18 PM
I'm with Malaki on this one. Mind you, I haven't dueled with lightsabers much, but I do heavy combat in the SCA, and while blade length does give an *advantage*, it's certainly not unsurmountable.

In fact, I know a few *very* good fighters whose fighting style can best be described as renting out space in their opponent's underwear. (Yes, *that* close.) At that range, a blade longer than 24" actually starts to *limit* your options against them. (You couldn't thrust them anymore if you wanted to, for one.)

Darth Viox
06-04-2008, 01:39 PM
I'm with Malaki on this one. Mind you, I haven't dueled with lightsabers much, but I do heavy combat in the SCA, and while blade length does give an *advantage*, it's certainly not unsurmountable.

In fact, I know a few *very* good fighters whose fighting style can best be described as renting out space in their opponent's underwear. (Yes, *that* close.) At that range, a blade longer than 24" actually starts to *limit* your options against them. (You couldn't thrust them anymore if you wanted to, for one.)


well I'm not stranger to SCA,
fighting is a little different though, theres many rules regarding weight of the weapon...

"swords (including basket hilt and gauntlet) are to weigh at least one pound per foot"

now my saber is over 4 ft in length and weights only 1 1/2 pounds.

so by SCA Standards my weapon would be disqualified.

In SCA yes a 24" blade weapon would have much more of an advantage due to the weight restrictions they have to simulate live steel conditions.

which pardon the pun, is Light Years different than how the saber is supposed to preform.

Now if we were talking Vibro Blades well then sir that'd be totally applicable.


24" would be fine for a Shoto style blade which would be fine for offhand use.

Voice
06-04-2008, 01:54 PM
Sure, your saber wouldn't be a legal SCA weapon, and the weight wouldn't be the *primary* reason, but the fighting styles aren't *that* different. If you can kill someone guaranteed because you have 6" more reach than them, it's because they don't know how to defend themselves.

For my local area, I have a fairly long sword at 32" of blade. I prefer fighting at medium range, but I can generally hold my own at longer or shorter ranges until you throw a knight or stick-jock at me, and I've killed my fair share of knights (though I've been killed by far more than I've killed).

Sword-length is really a *minor* advantage in the grand scheme of things.

Darth Viox
06-04-2008, 02:08 PM
Sure, your saber wouldn't be a legal SCA weapon, and the weight wouldn't be the *primary* reason, but the fighting styles aren't *that* different. If you can kill someone guaranteed because you have 6" more reach than them, it's because they don't know how to defend themselves.

For my local area, I have a fairly long sword at 32" of blade. I prefer fighting at medium range, but I can generally hold my own at longer or shorter ranges until you throw a knight or stick-jock at me, and I've killed my fair share of knights (though I've been killed by far more than I've killed).

Sword-length is really a *minor* advantage in the grand scheme of things.


i'm just tend to think longer than 36 is better, only time i get killed by a 36 is if they pretty much throw their self at me causing both of us to die.

as far as TCSS Blades are concerned, i think 36" is the best minimum.

but on side note i just found that the standard lightsaber length was 1.3 meters which i think someone may have misread because thats like 51.18 inches... now THAT seems too long

Darth Morbius
06-04-2008, 03:29 PM
To sum this up nicely, it takes a fair amount of skill to rush in on a great sword with a single saber. ;)

So there is a LOT of Validity to the length can be an advantage instance. However, it is up to each person's preference and fighting style that determines their preferred blade length.

Personally, I like mine around 34"-38"

Eandori
06-09-2008, 02:13 PM
If we are talking about a "lightsaber" then you are speaking about a weapon where the blade has no weight, the blade is around 34" to 36" long, and a single contact on any part of the blade burns/cuts what it touches.

A sword... is NOT a lightsaber. If you perform sword fighting style with a 40" heavy bladed weapon, then it's not "lightsaber fighting" in it's essence. I would probably describe what you are doing is battles with a "lightsaber style sword."

Yep, different lengths and weight swords all have their own associated fighting style. A small thin ninja blade is a handknife compared to the huge thick swords used by Scottmen, etc. Think Braveheart... A smaller blade will be quicker and more nimble where a long heavy blade will be slower and more forcefull.

And on that note... a "lightsaber" is much closer to a ninja sword.

Hasid Lafre
06-09-2008, 03:02 PM
Claymores were used to brake horses legs and not kill people as braveheart showed.

:D

goldsaberwarrior
06-12-2008, 09:27 AM
The best sword length always depends on the person using a sword. For a single hilt saber/sword I prefer my blade to be around 36-40 inches where as another person may prefer 34-38. I've always said the sword should be proportionate to the person using it. As an example where I prefer 36-40 inches for a blade if the guy that prefers 34-38 were to use my sword it may throw him/her off balance a touch where they prefer shorter blade length. Like I said before it's all fighting style and I say the sword should be proportionate to the person using it.

As far as the vibro blade vs lightsaber thing goes this is my take. A lightsaber would be a touch harder to use as there's no counter weight to the hilt. A lightsaber blade is weightless. A vibro blade would be easier as there is a counter weight to the hilt. Also vibro blades have a special weave of cortis ore to protect against lightsaber sparring damage. Because of their fighting style jedi/sith prefer the lightsaber in most cases where as a non jedi/sith would prefer a vibro blade in most cases. Like it was said before a lightsaber instantly burns and/or cuts anything it touches. vibro blades require more force as they aren't "heated" like a lightsaber. forgive the heated pun I can't think of a better word that applies. Lastly a vibro blade would be more likely to make you bleed to death or electrocute you from the energy field that pops on when the hilt is "activated". Other than one major and a few minor differences lightsabers and vibro blades are almost the same thing.

Eandori
06-12-2008, 01:09 PM
A lightsaber would be a touch harder to use as there's no counter weight to the hilt.

An object spins about it's center of gravity. The most effortless place to spin an object is directly on it's center of gravity. If you hold an object not on the center of gravity, the farther away you move from it the more effort it requires. That's just basic physics.

A "lightsaber" would have it's CoG about the middle of the hilt. A "sword" will have it's CoG probably into the blade. So by that sheer nature, they will NOT have a similar fighting style. The lightsaber would be far more nimble, fast, and lethal upon touch. A sword must contact on one of it's edges, at the right swing angle, and with enough force to cut. It's really entirely different when you really compare them.

If you get a thick walled saber, with a long blade and swing it like a sword... then you are.... NOT fighting "lightsaber style." You are fighting with a lightsaber using sword style battle. There's nothing wrong with that, if that's what you like... that's just fine. But it's not what a lightsaber would be like at all. that's just the fact of it.

I enjoy making my replica sabers as much like a real lightsaber as I can possibly get them. That means make the blade as close to weightless as I can get it. Put the center of gravity as deep into the hilt as I can. Then finally, learn the fighting style that compliments that type of weapon.

Fighting with a lightsaber that is built like a sword is kinda like taking a dragster to a NASCAR race track. Sure you can do it. If that's what you enjoy then fine, have fun! But racing dragsters on a NASCAR track is not the same thing as a NASCAR race. Just the same, building a lightsaber to be weight balanced like a sword and using sword fighting styles is not something I would call a "lightsaber battle."

Nothing wrong with it, if that's what you enjoy great! Have fun with it.

Voice
06-12-2008, 02:14 PM
Actually, a well balanced, single-hand sword has it's center of gravity as close to the guard as possible. This is actually a good spot because it gives the blade a slight (though distinct) 'forward' feel, making it easy to feel which way the blade is pointing without wearing out your hand and wrist with the weight.

I'm really not sure that a lightsaber having it's balance point right in the middle of the hilt would be better, because it doesn't provide you with that feel. That could be a bad thing, especially with how 'spinny' lightsaber combat is in the prequels.

A sword with the center of gravity deep into the blade is going to feel *very* tip heavy, and unsuitable for quick combat, though it will be better at hacking through things, because most of the mass is traveling at faster speeds on impact.

Novastar
06-12-2008, 08:45 PM
Voice is right on this one, Eandori... although you WOULD be correct if the hilts made never took into consideration having "more" weight at the bottom of a hilt/handle.

The entire reason a sword prop/replica/"real McCoy" can be balanced is taking into consideration the length (and therefore weight) of the blade... and finding a way to make the hilt work in a fashion that causes the balancing point to be near to or directly below the leading hand.

Now... SOME people prefer the balance somewhat "forward" of the leading hand. That is, maybe a few inches past any guard onto the blade for the balancing... but most CERTAINLY you would NEVER want the balance point to be way the 'ell up the blade... with the sole exception on if the prop/sword/etc. was just plain super light and super short in the first place... and even then, it'd be nice to have it balanced if possible.

Voice
06-12-2008, 09:03 PM
Yeah, I've had a bit of first-hand experience with the subject. Not an expert by any measure, mind you, but when you're in a dorm with a bunch of other medieval enthusiasts, you can find yourself doing some pretty stupid things. After all, experience is life's way of saying, "Boy was *that* stupid!".)

We had a 4-way free-for-all duel with our swords at one point. 2 had 'display edges' (they look sharp, but the edge is ground flat), 1 actually sharp, and one of those monster blades you can get at the Ren Fair that will take a chunk out of an anvil. Our rules included such safety-concious things as: 'pull your blow', and 'if it *would* have hit you, you're dead'. (Like I said, it was stupid.)

Eandori
06-13-2008, 01:45 PM
Are you talking about swordfighting Novastar? Because I'm speaking about what a real lightsaber would be like, true to the form created in Star Wars. Those are 2 different things. What you know about swordfighting (and I realize you are extremely experienced there) does not 100% apply because a lightsaber if it existed would be a different weapon.

Star Wars movies created a weapon with a weightless blade. If the blade is weightless, then the center of gravity will be closer to the center of the hilt unless the emitter assembly is VERY heavy in comparison to the pommel. Even then, it will only be CLOSER to the emitter, never beyond it. So if you want to make a Star Wars lightsaber replica... and the blade is supposed to be weightless, then the center of gravity will NEVER EVER be beyond the hilt. And most likely it will be towards the center of the hilt.

Make sense? No, this is not a matter of swordfighting experience. It's a matter of physics. Grab any bladeless lightsaber hilt, find the center of gravity. You will verify exactly what i'm talking about. Do this with any bladeless lightsaber hilt you have. I 100% promise you that NONE of them will have a center of gravity at one of the ends or beyond the hilt itself. (yes a center of gravity can even exist where there is no material, an example would be a wire coat-hanger...)

So... since a real lightsaber would be much different, a sword with lots of weight is NOT a lightsaber. The farther up the hilt your center of gravity is... the less your weapon-replica is like a real lightsaber.

Voice
06-13-2008, 02:25 PM
Eandori, you're not contradicting anything Novastar or I have said on the subject. I just corrected you about the balance point on a sword, and explained *why* that balance point being where it is is a good thing. Novastar simply agreed.

Then again, if you look at how the lightsabers move in the movies, you'll see they certainly don't behave like they have a weightless blade, so I'm not sure what you're arguing about.

Darth Viox
06-13-2008, 03:55 PM
Bottom line is regardless of what the movies simulate as to a weightless blade, ours are not.

argue all you want, but every lightsaber in our time has weight on either end, and the point of this thread is not about the correct size of a weightless light blade leingth but the pros and cons of longer vs shorter blades, and as a few have already states it all depends on style and skill.

some prefer shorter blades in the 24" - 32" range for their twirling since the light looks brigher...

Others like myself prefer 36" - 40" for more a more effective and practical use at the minimal cost of a dimmer blade and the possible structural integrity weakness.

as far as balance in my blade, when it was at 40" it was fantastic due to the materials i put into my hilt, it evened out.

Eandori
06-13-2008, 09:02 PM
Voice is right on this one, Eandori... although you WOULD be correct if the hilts made never took into consideration having "more" weight at the bottom of a hilt/handle.
That looks like disagreeing to me... I "would be correct" implies that I'm not.

But I am. Take your blade out of your saber and look for the center of gravity. You'll see.

I would state that the only reason sabers in the movies had any weight in the blade is because they had to for proper filming and effects. The simple fact that lucas used light as possible graphite rods in the final movies kinda tells you that he really was intending a weightless blade. That is pretty much verified in the Wikipedia description of the tools used for filming, link given here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightsaber

For The Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones, the lightsaber props were upgraded to resin "stunt" hilts and aluminium tubes. Early on, the intense activity of recording these scenes revealed powdery flakes of debris against the green/bluescreen backdrops, a dust produced when the stunt blades slammed together. This was corrected by simply wrapping the stunt blades in color-coded construction paper. For the final film of the Star Wars saga, Revenge of the Sith, the aluminium was replaced by a carbon-fiber blend specifically manufactured for the production. These props had to be reinforced because during the early stages of these props' use, they would often snap from the impact when the actors used them to film combat sequences.

From Wookieepedia... http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Lightsaber

Because of the unique balance of the saber, with all its weight in the hilt, and a strong gyroscopic effect it was very difficult for the untrained to wield. In the hands of an expert in tune with the Force, such as the Jedi or their fallen brethren, the Sith, the lightsaber was a weapon to be greatly respected, even feared. To wield a lightsaber was to demonstrate incredible skill and confidence, as well as masterful dexterity and attunement to the Force.

It's very clear that a lightsaber blade was intended to have no weight. The fact that you cannot swing it like a sword was also intended to be something that shows a new level of skill. Not a drawback, per say. Jedi's could do it... others could not.

So again I say....

If you want to use your lightsaber like a sword, then great. Have fun. But the more like a swordfight it is, the less a lightsaber fight it is.

Darth Viox
06-13-2008, 09:26 PM
If you want to use Wookiepedia as a legitimate source for arguements then read this

"Records from circa 400 BBY indicate that Keiran Halcyon constructed a special dual phase lightsaber that could go from the standard 1.3 meters to a length of three meters with flick of a switch"

Now it says Standard is 1.3 Meters
1.3 Meters is 51.18 inch

The Longest length recorded 3 meters
3 meters is 118.11 inch

Now on Wikipedia it lists the Standard Length as APROX 1 meter
which converted is..
1 Meter is 39.37 inch

wookiepedia standard is 51.18"
wikipedia standard is 39.37

Inbetween rests 40"
I had great balance at 40"

as far as using a lightsaber as a sword...

If it's got a handle... and it's got a blade... it sure as hell isn't a hamburger, it's a sword like weapon, all skill and training to use a weapon with a handle and blade is different for every weapon but what it all boils down to is it's a type of a sword.

and bashing us for using a Lightsaber as a sword is just down right wrong, because our Lightsaber hilts obviously cannot emmit "a very tight loop of highly focused energy, or a loop of plasma contained in a strong magnetic or other field"

there forth the blade has weight, the weapon has a center of balance, the hilt varies in length, and due to it's unique shape and it's durability, it can be used in many different ways.

Eandori
06-14-2008, 12:06 AM
You are totally missing the point.

I'm not bashing you, using sabers the way you do, or anything. I'm trying to make it clear that a "Lightsaber" as imagined by George Lucas himself is not exactly like a sword, nor did he intend it to be used like one.

Sure, information found in those pages can be bogus. Are you really going to deny that George Lucas imagined lightsabers to be a weightless blade weapon that only Jedi's can use right? Seriously? Are you really going to try to claim that's not the case?

Again (and for like the 4th time?!?) If you like using your saber like a sword then fine. Do that. I'm not bashing you for it. But it's not a traditional lightsaber usage as imagined by the creator himself. Is it?

Darth Viox
06-16-2008, 12:18 PM
You are totally missing the point.

I'm not bashing you, using sabers the way you do, or anything. I'm trying to make it clear that a "Lightsaber" as imagined by George Lucas himself is not exactly like a sword, nor did he intend it to be used like one.

Sure, information found in those pages can be bogus. Are you really going to deny that George Lucas imagined lightsabers to be a weightless blade weapon that only Jedi's can use right? Seriously? Are you really going to try to claim that's not the case?

Again (and for like the 4th time?!?) If you like using your saber like a sword then fine. Do that. I'm not bashing you for it. But it's not a traditional lightsaber usage as imagined by the creator himself. Is it?

Actually the original name for lightsabers were "Laser-Swords", as mentioned by the creator himself, but was changed to Lightsaber, which a Saber is still type of sword and the word Light is more based upon the apperance of the blade rather than the weight, hence Lightsaber.

No the point is not lost it's there, but you're missing the point that regardless of weight, or name, or what ever you think you're being right about, it's a sword, just a very fancy, high tech and "Elegant" sword.

And i'll quote your source of preference Wookiepedia
"Lightsaber combat was the preferred method of fighting used by the Jedi and Sith, which was initially based on ancient sword-fighting techniques."

"All seven traditional lightsaber forms included the same basic techniques as ancient sword-fighting styles, such as defensive postures, overhand strikes, parries, and counterstrikes."

Heres some Behind the Scenes Info on lightsabers.
" * Peter Diamond created the original trilogy lightsaber choreographies. It was based by a bit of Kendo and fencing. It was Peter who thought about how to hold the lightsaber by two hands.

* During the prequel trilogy, Nick Gillard was the swordmaster and instructed Liam Neeson, Ewan McGregor, Hayden Christensen and the other on-screen duelists through their battle scenes. "


Thus it is in every sense of the word and application both in Production Notes, Choreography, Fighting Style, on Screen Use and Imagination, A SWORD.

And please... Note that it was based on Kendo and Fencing...
Which correct me if i'm wrong, are two schools where swords are used... unless i've some how mistaken fencing for the sale of stolen goods to a middle man... but i'm sure i'm right here.

Which means even though the blade is weightless it still maintains the application of sword like properties which means regardless of blade weight when pressure or some kind of resisting force is applied to the blade weight and balance points become an issue which brings us BACK ONTO THE ORIGINAL TOPIC

is 40" of blade too much for a 1 3/4" Deep Emitter, or was the blade being broken simply a matter of a possible flaw and or just a one time fluke and should a 2 inch deep emitter be considered... and please try not to get off topic again, this is the LED Blade discussion area, not the "Whats going on in Lucas' Head Discussion" Area... for that, there is www.TheForce.Net

Eandori
06-16-2008, 10:38 PM
Thanks for all that research and time you spent looking up that stuff.

A lightsaber is still supposed to be a weightless blade weapon, and the heavier your blade is, the less like a lightsaber it is. I know you are correct about the roots of how it came to be and what people use to learn the swordplay. But still, the fact remains... the heavier your blade is, the less like a lightsaber it would be.

And yes, I'm still on the topic because I originally posted that a lightsaber blade will be more sturdy if it's shorter. So... it won't break as often.

goldsaberwarrior
06-30-2008, 12:03 AM
I've gotta step in here. Yes you are right about the center of gravity for a lightsaber of star wars standards having a weightless blade and a center of gravity around the center of the hilt. Also what was said about the balance point of a sword is correct. A lightsaber is basically an advanced sword. The blade is weightless enabling the jedi to do more with it than could be accomplished with a sword or vibro blade if you go by star wars standards. For the most part except for a few exceptions the lightsaber in the movies were used like swords. There will always be things a true lightsaber can do a sword will never be able to do.

In the movies they swing the sabers like the blades are weightless becaue they are. In spite of this fact the jedi and the sith use their sabers like swords. I agree if we had real lightsabers today we probably would fight a little different with them because they have no weight in the blade but not so much different because the sabers act like swords. Naturally you would fight different and more lightsaber like with a real lightsaber because of the reason I and a few others named. No one is saying you don't know what you're talking about but simply correcting you so you'll be 100% accurate.

Edit: Also if you like trying to make your saber seem weightless in the blade when you use it that's up to you but I fight like it's a sword just more advanced. Also as was shown if you don't have a good support for the weight of one of our blades it can and most likely will eventually snap.

gundamaniac
07-12-2008, 01:01 AM
Wow that was the first time I've ever seen a thickwall break like that. I managed to break an MR ESB Vader blade cleanly at the emitter, but I had always just chalked that up to the (lack of) durability of an MR saber. Crazy.

Back when I started asking about LED saber building, I remembered people were always advocating sinking the blade in quite deep, about 3 inches minimum as I recall. Then Tim came out with his blade holders sunken 2 inches, and it seems to have held up just fine. I've never seen anyone with a bladeholder sunken less than 2 inches, and to be honest I'd be nervous about sinking a blade less than 2 inches into the hilt. As for the 40-incher...well that's just a matter of your preference. If you like the weight balance and reach of it and don't mind the dimmer blade, then that's great. There is the matter of the extra inches putting stress on the blade where it meets the bladeholder, but it sounds like your saber held up for quite awhile so it shouldn't be too big of a deal. After all, something made to be smashed around like a lightsaber is giong to break someday. And blades are cheap. No biggie.

Darth Leximus
07-18-2008, 09:44 AM
Had to bump this....

While running through choreography with my brother last night I experienced the dread blade break!

We were both using Tim's 1" thick walled blades and we do duel twice a week and near full speed for about 3 hours each session. So the blade had been through some abuse. We were trying out some new additions to the fight which include a pivoting "Windmill" type overhand strike followed closely by another reversed version of the same strike. It's a very powerful combo and in hindsight probably should have pulled back a little on the throttle!

Anyway i was able to saw about 2" off the tip of the blade and reattach my tip and we are good to go again.

BTW the blade broke about 1.5" from the tip. Didn't think to take pics cause I was trying to get up and runnin again ASAP!

Count Malik
07-18-2008, 12:13 PM
WOW! And a thick walled to!

Darth Leximus
07-18-2008, 12:28 PM
Yeah thick on thick at full speed = break city!