Main Discussion Area > English Warbow
Standarts of accuracy
sagitarius boemoru:
I think with a bow which does have decent armour piercing capability if half of the shots hit its acceptable.
(Se how cleverly I avoided specification of weight)
Jaro
sagitarius boemoru:
We should not forget, that medieval archers have to be able to judge distance well, when they shot sucessfully at advancing enemy. And judging the distance is the harder part.
Jaro
Badger:
At 100 yards i would be impressed to see an archer hit a hay bale with some consistency say 3 out of 5, at 200 yards if one could place the arrows in a 6 meter square that i would consider pretty good also. Steve
Yeomanbowman:
Chaps,
I'm not sure this really advances the issue of acceptable accuracy but even a mediocre archer is more accurate than a man armed with a musket, circa 17th century. Yet these were effective enough in massed a volley at close range and with a slow rate of fire.
sagitarius boemoru:
You mean low individual rate of fire, not total. Musketry routine is based on the rows of people reloading while others discharge. The main advantage of arquibuis or musket is a fact you can take a person which is not very physically fit and make out of him a musketeer in relativelly short time. On the other hand to have a good archer you need to start him early and train at least couple of years.
Musket accuracy in 17. century was based on hiting barn door at prescribed distance. (I provide exact distance, my friend has a musket, hell know it.)
:)
But this is comparing apples and oranges.
Jaro
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version