Main Discussion Area > English Warbow
Warbow FPS?
llkinak:
--- Quote ---Ah ok, I'm with you on the numbers (it's not my thing!) I was quoting the video clip where the guy said it was the same as a 44 mag bullet.
However, surely a bullet is far smaller than an arrow? So even with the same force and speed behind it, a bullet is more likely to make a clean hole straight through, while an arrow has more surface area so will deliver a harder punch? I am terrible with physics, but if the arrow doesn't penetrate, isn't that more likely to deliver blunt force to the target? All the energy that should be used to punch through the armour is being spent/wasted on the area around it, like a great meaty fist thumping into the chest?
Or have I got that totally wrong?
--- End quote ---
Well, there a couple of thing about your statement that are not quite accurate. They apparently used a .44 magnum as a comparison, so let's use that.
1. Comparing a .44 mag to any arrow is the epitome of apples to oranges. The .44 is a far more powerful projectile since it is traveling much, much faster, well over 1,000 fps faster. Now, it is lighter, but you can increase a projectile's energy more by speeding it up than by making it heavier, and a projectile's energy is what defines it's ability to do work.
2. In terms of diameter, a .44 mag, which is .429 caliber, is actually closer to an arrow than you might think. .429 is about 11mm, so slightly larger than 3/8 inch, not too far from warbow arrow diameter. However, a .44 mag typically has a flat fronted projectile, rather than a point as on a bodkin. This doesn't matter all that much for our purposes, since we're talking about non-penetrating rounds, but it is interesting.
3. .44 magnum rounds produce between 900-1300 foot pounds of energy depending on the loading. (Some exceptions, but that's the general area.) Warbow arrows produce about 10% of that depending on various factors, but any bow putting out 130 foot pounds would be an extremely powerful bow.
4. Given that a man wearing body armor who is struck by a .44 mag, or, as I said, even high velocity rifle rounds like a .308, isn't knocked back, why would a warbow arrow, which only has a fraction of the power, be able to accomplish this? The answer is, it can't. True, either projectile will impart energy into it's target, and in doing so will effect that target, but a man walking forward won't be knocked off his feet by either one.
WillS:
Well, I can't argue with that! Thanks for the detailed reply!
I guess it's another case of TV shows really trying to push the "scare factor" of medieval weapons, when really they're not that effective! I suppose if they were that effective, we wouldn't need gunpowder...!
Still, I can't help thinking that a normal man getting hit full on with a half inch war arrow from a true warbow is gonna feel a kick like a horse, and whether stumbling or actually forced backwards by the impact is irrelevant if the weapon does what it's meant to do!
llkinak:
I think arrows can be very effective...if they penetrate into the body. If they don't then they're pretty much completely ineffective. Interesting you mention being kicked by a horse. Now there's something which will move a guy around a bit.
mullet:
This discussion has been long and very interesting. One thing I can add to this is you guys know your warbows but across the pond we know our firearms ;D. I hunt hogs with my .44 Mag with 300 grain bullets and I've seen them flip a pig on his arse, and I don't care how much armor you want to put on, you don't want to get hit in the chest with my .300 WinMag or for that matter, my 50 caliber flintlock. But, I also have know doubt a half inch arrow to the chest with armor on, not expecting it, would put my little arse on the ground, also.
WillS:
I also reckon that if you caught somebody off centre you'd see far more movement from their body. Imagine a war arrow whacking into a shoulder or hip. That's gonna spin you round no matter what!
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version