|
|
Post by kekistani on Jan 19, 2020 9:58:13 GMT 5
The mako usually targets fish and soft-boiled prey (seals are jiggly for a reason) that is usually smaller than them. Most prey is struck in ambush and have no chance to defend themselves. I have yet to see a mako inflict severe damage on a boat. The daspletosaurs are going to be attacking an animal much larger than themselves that can defend itself. If the dinosaur is biting the mammoth and it kicks, it will be bowled over. The mammoth certainly can kick fast enough to defend itself. This: www.newsweek.com/shark-attack-swordfish-mayotte-france-indian-ocean-1467929. And bear in mind this was a feeding bite, not a full on attack. And yes, a kick will easily bowel a theropod over. The question is if it can land it, which I seriously doubt for all the reasons I gave. "Nothing dangerous happened, we only suffered a bit of damage," he added."
"The Mako shark defends its prey by keeping any potential predators at a distance." both from the article. The Mako defensively (and therefore not in feeding) bit the boat and only caused a "bit of damage". Piercing hollow plastic does not make the Mako a good comparison here.
Seeing as the Theropods will be close, actually touching the mammoth, and the mammoth can kick swiftly, I don't doubt that it can land a kick.
|
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Jan 19, 2020 13:10:02 GMT 5
"Nothing dangerous happened, we only suffered a bit of damage," he added."
"The Mako shark defends its prey by keeping any potential predators at a distance." both from the article. The Mako defensively (and therefore not in feeding) bit the boat and only caused a "bit of damage". Piercing hollow plastic does not make the Mako a good comparison here.
Seeing as the Theropods will be close, actually touching the mammoth, and the mammoth can kick swiftly, I don't doubt that it can land a kick.
Yeah, my bad. It was DEFENSIVE - not full potential due to that; would be more if it was offensive. Nonetheless, from Nile monitor to mako sharks, we've seen the overall damage potential of animals like this if only via indirect comparison. Again, there's the thing about speed and dexterity in close quarters. The relatively high speed of the dinosaurs and the relatively limited range/dexterity of kicking and lashin out is....not good for the mammoth. |
|
|
|
Post by kekistani on Jan 19, 2020 13:34:49 GMT 5
"Nothing dangerous happened, we only suffered a bit of damage," he added."
"The Mako shark defends its prey by keeping any potential predators at a distance." both from the article. The Mako defensively (and therefore not in feeding) bit the boat and only caused a "bit of damage". Piercing hollow plastic does not make the Mako a good comparison here.
Seeing as the Theropods will be close, actually touching the mammoth, and the mammoth can kick swiftly, I don't doubt that it can land a kick.
Yeah, my bad. It was DEFENSIVE - not full potential due to that; would be more if it was offensive. Nonetheless, from Nile monitor to mako sharks, we've seen the overall damage potential of animals like this if only via indirect comparison. Again, there's the thing about speed and dexterity in close quarters. The relatively high speed of the dinosaurs and the relatively limited range/dexterity of kicking and lashin out is....not good for the mammoth. Neither of which are really comparable to Tyrannosaurs. We've seen nothing that really supports your point.
That doesn't matter once the dinosaur is actually touching the mammoth. The mammoth can and will be able to knock down at least one of the dinosaurs even with a rear-end attack. Elephants actually ahve surprisingly good range of mobility with their legs:
Guy wasn't even fully behind the elephant and it still hit him. The mammoth is capable of defending itself easily.
|
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Jan 19, 2020 18:09:06 GMT 5
Yeah, my bad. It was DEFENSIVE - not full potential due to that; would be more if it was offensive. Nonetheless, from Nile monitor to mako sharks, we've seen the overall damage potential of animals like this if only via indirect comparison. Again, there's the thing about speed and dexterity in close quarters. The relatively high speed of the dinosaurs and the relatively limited range/dexterity of kicking and lashin out is....not good for the mammoth. Neither of which are really comparable to Tyrannosaurs. We've seen nothing that really supports your point.
That doesn't matter once the dinosaur is actually touching the mammoth. The mammoth can and will be able to knock down at least one of the dinosaurs even with a rear-end attack. Elephants actually ahve surprisingly good range of mobility with their legs:
Guy wasn't even fully behind the elephant and it still hit him. The mammoth is capable of defending itself easily.
Yes, unfortunately, there is no modern analogue for tyrannosaurids in terms of animals. Maybe looking to weapons would be better; a serrated knife or pickaxe is similar in that they both crush and slash, and it's extremely lethal. As for the video you posted, two things to consider: 1: A Daspletosaurus would have about ~4.5 meters of torso, and therefore reach, cantilevered out in front of it. This may help it stay out of range of the kick in the first place. 2: The person was (relatively) low to the ground. Meanwhile, the legs of the Daspletosaurus would help it a lot to avoid a kick by both supporting the extra reach and presenting a smaller area to hit. |
|
|
|
Post by kekistani on Jan 19, 2020 22:52:48 GMT 5
Neither of which are really comparable to Tyrannosaurs. We've seen nothing that really supports your point.
That doesn't matter once the dinosaur is actually touching the mammoth. The mammoth can and will be able to knock down at least one of the dinosaurs even with a rear-end attack. Elephants actually ahve surprisingly good range of mobility with their legs:
Guy wasn't even fully behind the elephant and it still hit him. The mammoth is capable of defending itself easily.
Yes, unfortunately, there is no modern analogue for tyrannosaurids in terms of animals. Maybe looking to weapons would be better; a serrated knife or pickaxe is similar in that they both crush and slash, and it's extremely lethal. As for the video you posted, two things to consider: 1: A Daspletosaurus would have about ~4.5 meters of torso, and therefore reach, cantilevered out in front of it. This may help it stay out of range of the kick in the first place. 2: The person was (relatively) low to the ground. Meanwhile, the legs of the Daspletosaurus would help it a lot to avoid a kick by both supporting the extra reach and presenting a smaller area to hit. Which is why neither of your comparisons were not good. Serrated knives are more like carcharodontosaur teeth (thin and cutting). Pickaxes are more like it.
And when it bites the mammoth, the mammoth's kicking will throw it off. It will probably break its teeth and get knocked down due to the action of the mammoth. The person was also not directly behind the mammoth and is about the height of Daspletosaurus' belly. The mammoth can still strike daspletosaurus.
|
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Jan 19, 2020 23:50:58 GMT 5
Yes, unfortunately, there is no modern analogue for tyrannosaurids in terms of animals. Maybe looking to weapons would be better; a serrated knife or pickaxe is similar in that they both crush and slash, and it's extremely lethal. As for the video you posted, two things to consider: 1: A Daspletosaurus would have about ~4.5 meters of torso, and therefore reach, cantilevered out in front of it. This may help it stay out of range of the kick in the first place. 2: The person was (relatively) low to the ground. Meanwhile, the legs of the Daspletosaurus would help it a lot to avoid a kick by both supporting the extra reach and presenting a smaller area to hit. Which is why neither of your comparisons were not good. Serrated knives are more like carcharodontosaur teeth (thin and cutting). Pickaxes are more like it.
And when it bites the mammoth, the mammoth's kicking will throw it off. It will probably break its teeth and get knocked down due to the action of the mammoth. The person was also not directly behind the mammoth and is about the height of Daspletosaurus' belly. The mammoth can still strike daspletosaurus.
Serrated knives was moreso of a cross comparison; they do primarily slice, but IIRC there are times where they have been able to, say, stab through bone. The mammoth's kicking wouldn't necessarily throw off the tyrannosaurs (they will bite fairly far from the exertion of the force), nor will they be attacking close to the exertion point of the force. As for where the kick would strike, maybe the size comp would be useful now:  (mammoth by Larramendi, Daspletosaurus by Franoys) As we can see, the torso and legs are at least slightly out of kick range, and the torso can be made even further away if the dinosaurs adopt a slanted stance while attacking. Not to mention, there are 3 of them, so while the mammoth focuses on 1, the other 2 are free to attack |
|
|
|
Post by kekistani on Jan 20, 2020 0:07:17 GMT 5
Which is why neither of your comparisons were not good. Serrated knives are more like carcharodontosaur teeth (thin and cutting). Pickaxes are more like it.
And when it bites the mammoth, the mammoth's kicking will throw it off. It will probably break its teeth and get knocked down due to the action of the mammoth. The person was also not directly behind the mammoth and is about the height of Daspletosaurus' belly. The mammoth can still strike daspletosaurus.
Serrated knives was moreso of a cross comparison; they do primarily slice, but IIRC there are times where they have been able to, say, stab through bone. The mammoth's kicking wouldn't necessarily throw off the tyrannosaurs (they will bite fairly far from the exertion of the force), nor will they be attacking close to the exertion point of the force. As for where the kick would strike, maybe the size comp would be useful now: (mammoth by Larramendi, Daspletosaurus by Franoys) As we can see, the torso and legs are at least slightly out of kick range, and the torso can be made even further away if the dinosaurs adopt a slanted stance while attacking. Not to mention, there are 3 of them, so while the mammoth focuses on 1, the other 2 are free to attack The mammoth's kicking would at least break teeth and discourage the dinosaurs. At worst it strikes them and breaks bones/knocks them down. To bite the leg of the mammoth the dinosaur has to lean down/crane its neck down which leaves it vulnerable.
The mammoth has defenses both front and rear. It can handle at least 2 dinosaurs at a time.
|
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Jan 20, 2020 0:28:58 GMT 5
Serrated knives was moreso of a cross comparison; they do primarily slice, but IIRC there are times where they have been able to, say, stab through bone. The mammoth's kicking wouldn't necessarily throw off the tyrannosaurs (they will bite fairly far from the exertion of the force), nor will they be attacking close to the exertion point of the force. As for where the kick would strike, maybe the size comp would be useful now: (mammoth by Larramendi, Daspletosaurus by Franoys) As we can see, the torso and legs are at least slightly out of kick range, and the torso can be made even further away if the dinosaurs adopt a slanted stance while attacking. Not to mention, there are 3 of them, so while the mammoth focuses on 1, the other 2 are free to attack The mammoth's kicking would at least break teeth and discourage the dinosaurs. At worst it strikes them and breaks bones/knocks them down. To bite the leg of the mammoth the dinosaur has to lean down/crane its neck down which leaves it vulnerable.
The mammoth has defenses both front and rear. It can handle at least 2 dinosaurs at a time.
Break teeth? The teeth are adapted to withstand a lot of force; I seriously doubt they'd get broken so easily. And tyrannosaurids have powerful, fast-striking neck muscles. That would reduce vulnerability a lot. As for front and back defenses, it needs to focus on just one. Swinging its tusks randomly back and forth while also kicking is going to be relatively easy to avoid; it has to choose one to work best. |
|
|
|
Post by kekistani on Jan 20, 2020 0:37:18 GMT 5
The mammoth's kicking would at least break teeth and discourage the dinosaurs. At worst it strikes them and breaks bones/knocks them down. To bite the leg of the mammoth the dinosaur has to lean down/crane its neck down which leaves it vulnerable.
The mammoth has defenses both front and rear. It can handle at least 2 dinosaurs at a time.
Break teeth? The teeth are adapted to withstand a lot of force; I seriously doubt they'd get broken so easily. And tyrannosaurids have powerful, fast-striking neck muscles. That would reduce vulnerability a lot. As for front and back defenses, it needs to focus on just one. Swinging its tusks randomly back and forth while also kicking is going to be relatively easy to avoid; it has to choose one to work best. Just because the teeth can withstand a lot of force doesn't mean they won't break off from previous wear and tear or the sheer force of the mammoth kicking.
It doesn't necessarily need to focus on just one. If a dinosaur attacks it's leg and another attacks the front, such a tactic would be workable. Not to mention if it runs forward while the tyrannosaurs are biting it could drag them for a ways.
|
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Jan 20, 2020 1:19:08 GMT 5
Break teeth? The teeth are adapted to withstand a lot of force; I seriously doubt they'd get broken so easily. And tyrannosaurids have powerful, fast-striking neck muscles. That would reduce vulnerability a lot. As for front and back defenses, it needs to focus on just one. Swinging its tusks randomly back and forth while also kicking is going to be relatively easy to avoid; it has to choose one to work best. Just because the teeth can withstand a lot of force doesn't mean they won't break off from previous wear and tear or the sheer force of the mammoth kicking.
It doesn't necessarily need to focus on just one. If a dinosaur attacks it's leg and another attacks the front, such a tactic would be workable. Not to mention if it runs forward while the tyrannosaurs are biting it could drag them for a ways.
Doesn't necessarily mean they would either. These teeth are DESIGNED for a lifetime of bone-crushing; they have to be quite strong. And how would it be able to actually hit 2 or mire simultaneously or shortly within one another? The tisks and kicks would be relatively easy to dodge, and the attention diverted |
|
|
|
Post by kekistani on Jan 20, 2020 2:23:44 GMT 5
Just because the teeth can withstand a lot of force doesn't mean they won't break off from previous wear and tear or the sheer force of the mammoth kicking.
It doesn't necessarily need to focus on just one. If a dinosaur attacks it's leg and another attacks the front, such a tactic would be workable. Not to mention if it runs forward while the tyrannosaurs are biting it could drag them for a ways.
Doesn't necessarily mean they would either. These teeth are DESIGNED for a lifetime of bone-crushing; they have to be quite strong. And how would it be able to actually hit 2 or mire simultaneously or shortly within one another? The tisks and kicks would be relatively easy to dodge, and the attention diverted And yet they still litter fossil beds everywhere. Tyrannosaur teeth were expendable, the animal could regrow them. An issue occurs if the animal loses too many teeth at one time.
The kicks would not be easy to dodge as once the animal is bitten it will kick, hitting the tyrannosaur. The elephant may also charge while being bitten if another aggressor appears toward the front which would drag the biting rear guard down.
|
|
|
|
Post by dinosauria101 on Jan 20, 2020 2:52:33 GMT 5
Doesn't necessarily mean they would either. These teeth are DESIGNED for a lifetime of bone-crushing; they have to be quite strong. And how would it be able to actually hit 2 or mire simultaneously or shortly within one another? The tisks and kicks would be relatively easy to dodge, and the attention diverted And yet they still litter fossil beds everywhere. Tyrannosaur teeth were expendable, the animal could regrow them. An issue occurs if the animal loses too many teeth at one time.
The kicks would not be easy to dodge as once the animal is bitten it will kick, hitting the tyrannosaur. The elephant may also charge while being bitten if another aggressor appears toward the front which would drag the biting rear guard down.
The teeth are not usually broken, they're either replacement teeth outgrown or teeth that have been dislocated by the fossilization process. As for the kicks, you are correct that when the mammoth is attacked, it will try to retaliate, but it's also easy for the Daspletosaurus to let go, repeat as needed with due caution, and evade the kicks. Regarding a frontal charge, also possible to just let go and not get dragged down. |
|
|
|
Post by Infinity Blade on Jan 20, 2020 3:16:20 GMT 5
Are there any records of elephant using their feet to strike out at say, other megamammals, as a means of seriously injuring them? Elephants kick, yes, sometimes even each other in agonistic displays. But that doesn't necessarily mean it's meant to seriously injure animals that weigh up to a certain size. As far as I'm aware, when it comes to killing (smaller contemporaneous) megamammals, it's not so much kicking as it is simply crushing them under their weight or, of course, goring them (and just using their heads in general).
|
|
|
|
Post by kekistani on Jan 20, 2020 3:35:10 GMT 5
Are there any records of elephant using their feet to strike out at say, other megamammals, as a means of seriously injuring them? Elephants kick, yes, sometimes even each other in agonistic displays. But that doesn't necessarily mean it's meant to seriously injure animals that weigh up to a certain size. As far as I'm aware, when it comes to killing (smaller contemporaneous) megamammals, it's not so much kicking as it is simply crushing them under their weight or, of course, goring them (and just using their heads in general). No, because in fights against other megamammals Elephants are usually the agressors i.e. charging. The whole "kicking" debate stems from dinosauria suggesting the elephant is defenseless from the rear. |
|
|
|
Post by kekistani on Jan 20, 2020 3:38:18 GMT 5
And yet they still litter fossil beds everywhere. Tyrannosaur teeth were expendable, the animal could regrow them. An issue occurs if the animal loses too many teeth at one time.
The kicks would not be easy to dodge as once the animal is bitten it will kick, hitting the tyrannosaur. The elephant may also charge while being bitten if another aggressor appears toward the front which would drag the biting rear guard down.
The teeth are not usually broken, they're either replacement teeth outgrown or teeth that have been dislocated by the fossilization process. As for the kicks, you are correct that when the mammoth is attacked, it will try to retaliate, but it's also easy for the Daspletosaurus to let go, repeat as needed with due caution, and evade the kicks. Regarding a frontal charge, also possible to just let go and not get dragged down. Exactly, so they're not built for "a lifetime of chomping" if they WEAR OUT and are continuously grown back.
That's if the daspletosaur doesn't get hit when the mammoth retaliates. The issue is that once the mammoth starts moving it has a head start on its action before the daspletosaur does, and will complete it quicker. If the daspletosaur doesn't realize the mammoth is charging before it actually moves, it will get dragged down. The main issue is simply that the mammoth can easily defend itself, while the daspletosaurs need to be on high alert lest the get stomped.
|
|
