Medieval and fantasy fight scenes

[jumbojak]

Shoot, my other reply seems to have disappeared. Hmm.... anyway, the time period I was talking about was right around the Hundred Years War but there was certainly a lead in as well. Take Ian Lespina from the bathroom video above; his reenactment kit dates to around 1450, and there waa armor in general circulation before that. The guilds making helmets in previous centuries gradually grew into the industrial operations of the late medieval period.

A full suit didn't spring into existence all of a sudden. There were coats and pairs of plates made to give greater protection to the torso that gradually developed into the full breast and back plates later on. Lames protecting the upper arms developed into full arm protection. All the while there was a lot of mail armor being produced and used. One of the first things William did after securing England was set up a wire turning facility in London to better supply his armies.

[xSilverPhinx]

That's interesting. I wonder how effective chain mail armour was at protecting against arrows though. It doesn't seem to be very effective, and as bows and arrows "evolved", maybe the material used and type of armour had to as well?

I read somewhere that bodkin arrows would pierce armour more than they broader arrowhead type, and as a result plate armour changed shape slightly to better deflect incoming arrows. I don't know if it's true, though. This would have happened more or less around the time of Henry V's victory at Agincourt. 

[jumbojak]

I can't say how effective mail was against arrows. There has been quite a bit of testing done in recent years and what I have seen appears inconclusive. A padded garment offers similar protection in some testing. There is also a lot of variations in mail construction. Butted rings are comparatively weak with riveted mail offering very good protection and brazed rings being nearly impervious. I don't know the historical basis for brazed mail though. It's possible this was done but seems unlikely to me.

Plate is another story entirely. A good reproduction will deflect arrows from very heavy bows. I'll look for a test in Sweeden where a 140lb longbow failed to penetrate at nearly point blank range. You could, of course, make a very crude reproduction and pierce it easily. Lots of flat surfaces and thin sheet isn't resistant to much abuse.

I have a suspicion that sources who mention arrows piercing plate armor mention it specifically because of how infrequently it occurred. Even at Agincourt Frenchman made it all the way to the English lines unharmed. A large portion of the casualties early in the battle were crossbow men who had been denied their shields - a specialist soldier who had to fight in a particular way and had bad weather working against him...

[xSilverPhinx]

I can't say how effective mail was against arrows. There has been quite a bit of testing done in recent years and what I have seen appears inconclusive. A padded garment offers similar protection in some testing. There is also a lot of variations in mail construction. Butted rings are comparatively weak with riveted mail offering very good protection and brazed rings being nearly impervious. I don't know the historical basis for brazed mail though. It's possible this was done but seems unlikely to me.

Plate is another story entirely. A good reproduction will deflect arrows from very heavy bows. I'll look for a test in Sweeden where a 140lb longbow failed to penetrate at nearly point blank range. You could, of course, make a very crude reproduction and pierce it easily. Lots of flat surfaces and thin sheet isn't resistant to much abuse.

I have a suspicion that sources who mention arrows piercing plate armor mention it specifically because of how infrequently it occurred. Even at Agincourt Frenchman made it all the way to the English lines unharmed. A large portion of the casualties early in the battle were crossbow men who had been denied their shields - a specialist soldier who had to fight in a particular way and had bad weather working against him...

That's interesting info. 

But crossbows are more powerful than longbows, aren't they? As in they pack a heavier punch even if one has to take longer to reload them and all...

[jumbojak]

Not necessarily. A crossbow is shorter in the arms so a heavier crossbow can have the same power as a longer, lighter traditional bow. If you look at hunting regulations a crossbow has to be quite a bit heavier in the pull to be considered acceptable, at least around here.

[Davin]

Another thing to note is that crossbows often fired bolts that had a smaller and sharper tip than arrows. They had good penetration power against both plate and chain.

Crossbow bolt:


Arrow:


Crossbows could fire smaller things than bows because bows had to fire arrows long enough to pull back and still keep the shaft against the bow to help with aiming.

[xSilverPhinx]

Civil war!

[xSilverPhinx]

Not necessarily. A crossbow is shorter in the arms so a heavier crossbow can have the same power as a longer, lighter traditional bow. If you look at hunting regulations a crossbow has to be quite a bit heavier in the pull to be considered acceptable, at least around here.

Cool, I didn't know that.

[xSilverPhinx]

Another thing to note is that crossbows often fired bolts that had a smaller and sharper tip than arrows. They had good penetration power against both plate and chain.

Crossbow bolt:


Arrow:


Crossbows could fire smaller things than bows because bows had to fire arrows long enough to pull back and still keep the shaft against the bow to help with aiming.

Yes but there are arrows with narrower arrowheads though?

[Davin]

Another thing to note is that crossbows often fired bolts that had a smaller and sharper tip than arrows. They had good penetration power against both plate and chain.

Crossbow bolt:
https://www.medievalcrossbow.info/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Medieval-Crossbow-Bolts.jpg

Arrow:
https://www.battlemerchant.com/images/product_images/info_images/0612128700_pfeil_arrow_mittelalter_jagdpfeil.jpg

Crossbows could fire smaller things than bows because bows had to fire arrows long enough to pull back and still keep the shaft against the bow to help with aiming.

Yes but there are arrows with narrower arrowheads though?

Still not as effective due to the length and feathers. The Crossbow bolts were closer to bullets.

Other advantages of the crossbow is a smaller form with equal to more power. Consistent power when shooting. A person using one could set it and then sit there and wait without having to spend too much more energy holding the arrow back waiting to fire. Because the bolts were smaller than arrows, they were also less affected by wind.

[Asmodean]

An arrow warps in flight... I wonder if that happens with a crossbow bolt. Because if not, that would aalso go a long way in explaining its armor penetration efficiency...

...after a very quick search, I found this high speed cam, and it does look like the projectile is more laterally stable in flight. Any one have a better high speed cam of a crossbow bolt? Preferably fired from something period-accurate?

(Arrow below. Looks pretty modern, but there is still a good deal of flexing. I suppose that may benefit digging into flesh or chainmail, but not so much plate)