Main Discussion Area > English Warbow
Warbow FPS?
WillS:
Here you go. Skip on to 5min51seconds. Mark Stretton, using a 150# warbow shooting half inch arrows, being recorded for speed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTDHOcWbVLQ
52 metres per second equates to 170fps. The video goes on to show what it does to armour. Not the most exacting tests, but gives you a good idea.
Del the cat:
I watched the rest of it.
Pretty good, he does 'dress up' the odd theory and the illustrations don't always support his theories.
There are as many illustrations of whip ended bows as reflexed tips.
His theory about mounted archers going through the ford to protect the crossing is bonkers! If the water was chest deep, then a horse couldn't gallop through it and you couldn't shoot a bow from the horse. It's glaringly obvious that the archers on your side of the river would be shooting to protect those wading over to establish a bridgehead.
Del
Atlatlista:
--- Quote from: Del the cat on November 02, 2013, 06:10:42 am ---I watched the rest of it.
Pretty good, he does 'dress up' the odd theory and the illustrations don't always support his theories.
There are as many illustrations of whip ended bows as reflexed tips.
His theory about mounted archers going through the ford to protect the crossing is bonkers! If the water was chest deep, then a horse couldn't gallop through it and you couldn't shoot a bow from the horse. It's glaringly obvious that the archers on your side of the river would be shooting to protect those wading over to establish a bridgehead.
Del
--- End quote ---
I totally agree with your interpretation, though I disagree that you can't shoot a longbow from horseback.
Del the cat:
--- Quote from: Atlatlista on November 02, 2013, 02:04:32 pm ---
--- Quote from: Del the cat on November 02, 2013, 06:10:42 am ---I watched the rest of it.
Pretty good, he does 'dress up' the odd theory and the illustrations don't always support his theories.
There are as many illustrations of whip ended bows as reflexed tips.
His theory about mounted archers going through the ford to protect the crossing is bonkers! If the water was chest deep, then a horse couldn't gallop through it and you couldn't shoot a bow from the horse. It's glaringly obvious that the archers on your side of the river would be shooting to protect those wading over to establish a bridgehead.
Del
--- End quote ---
I totally agree with your interpretation, though I disagree that you can't shoot a longbow from horseback.
--- End quote ---
I didn't say you can't shoot a longbow from horseback...
I said you can't shoot a longbow from the back of the horse in the situation we were discussing (in chest deep water)...
... do pay attention ;)
A horse in water upto a man's chest wouldn't be galloping, it would be wading or swimming. And the lower limb of the bow would be in the water!
In the video he gallops his horse through water 6" deep through a stream! Not chest deep to a man through a river!
Del
Atlatlista:
--- Quote from: Del the cat on November 03, 2013, 04:18:29 pm ---I didn't say you can't shoot a longbow from horseback...
I said you can't shoot a longbow from the back of the horse in the situation we were discussing (in chest deep water)...
... do pay attention ;)
A horse in water upto a man's chest wouldn't be galloping, it would be wading or swimming. And the lower limb of the bow would be in the water!
In the video he gallops his horse through water 6" deep through a stream! Not chest deep to a man through a river!
Del
--- End quote ---
Fair point. I'm personally in favor of an interpretation of mounted longbowmen in the hundred years' war as dragoons anyway - i.e. Poitiers.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version