Missle Weapon Pierce Attributes

[Vernah]

Hey all, im simply starting a discussion or question on what the actual penetration power of certain medieval weapons were, I've looked online but cant really get any sure descriptions or values on the ability of certain weapons (Crossbow, arbalest, longbow, composite bow, etc)

So my question is, what armor piercing ability did certain weapons have on chainmail, breast plates, full plate, gothic plate, etc? Such as:

-Early 12th century crossbows
-Heavy Crossbows
-Steel crossbows
-Arbalests
-Longbows
-Composite Bows
-Javelins

Please dont turn this into a longbow vs composite/crossbow discussion, theres 10000 sites on that haha. Anyways, if theres a site or info that you got on their penetration abilities of certain bows, crossbows, etc, I would appretiate it!

[Point Blank]

Roughly, and at very close range:
-Early 12th century crossbows: 110-140J
-Heavy Crossbows: 140-180J
-Steel crossbows: 180-220+
-Arbalests: 220J+
-Longbows: 80-100J
-Composite Bows: could be higher than longbows due to more efficiency due to construction, eg a 100lb Comp bow = approx a 120lb longbow
-Javelins: vary variable but probably in the mid 100's, remember all values are at close range.

[Vae victis]

What ranges are the weapons fired from? Arrows and bolts are far deadlier when shot at close range but lose their effectiveness as the range is increased and armor is added. I dont have any solid numbers, but I remember hearing that a 3-inch missle penetration into the right spots on a man can drop and kill him.

[Fakir]

All I know is that the BBC did a full-feature documentary on the battle of Agincourt. By research conducted, they came to the conclusion that the bodkin arrow was in fact not able to penetrate the armour of the French nobles on the opposing side.

[Vae victis]

All I know is that the BBC did a full-feature documentary on the battle of Agincourt. By research conducted, they came to the conclusion that the bodkin arrow was in fact not able to penetrate the armour of the French nobles on the opposing side.

I agree. I recently saw a similar show called "Warriors" from the history channel that showed the same thing. Lol, the whole show was about the English triumph at Agincourt through their use of the deadly longbow, but then it ended with a longbow demonstration that failed to show that the longbow could peirce armor or be effective at that range. This weapon might be over-rated and be similar to a composite bow like Point Blank suggested.

[ferretboy]

That show is on youtube

[Point Blank]

Yep longbow is generally over-rated and not enough consideration is given to the tactical circumstances (eg well-defended position, reckless attacker, mud etc).

Which is also why the AP attribute was removed from longbows.

[Fakir]

Yep longbow is generally over-rated and not enough consideration is given to the tactical circumstances (eg well-defended position, reckless attacker, mud etc).

That was actually the most decisive factor, according to their research.

[HighLord z0b]

It's a difficult question to answer, not because we can't test the power of bows or their effectiveness against a piece of armour, but because to truly answer the question you really need real life statistics. Which is really hard to do many hundreds of years after the last battle. For example to truly test longbow vs. French knight you would need to shoot hundreds of arrows from a longbow at a life size ballistics gel dummy in full armour on top of a ballistics gel horse, unless someone wants to volunteer to be a guinea pig!

Shooting arrows at a piece of armour can only give you an approximation of the effects. I've never seen a experiment that repeats the test hundreds of times to make it statistically valid, or that takes into account the armour as a whole. Whilst we can say a typical arrow from a longbow may not pierce a breastplate, one needs to take into account how many arrows were being fired at once and whether any of those arrows would penetrate the gap between breastplate and spaulder (shoulder piece) or get into the armpit or in the eye socket etc.

Also one needs to take into account how many horses would be killed or injured from a volley of arrows. Being thrown from a horse is very dangerous as anyone that's done much riding knows. It kills many thousands of people a year and leaves more paralyzed, and that's with modern medicine.

In any case I certainly think that SS and particuarly RC do a good job in approximation, for example it was silly to think that a longbow had some magical armour piercing bodkin point that no other bow possessed, or onthe other hand that a knight in full plate was arrow proof and impervious to arrow fire.

[Point Blank]

Agree that most of the cavalry casualties were the horses at places like Agincourt etc. The plunging fire from the massed English archers would be coming down at an oblique angle, which would tend to reduce its effect vs armor, but be very effective vs horses.

[welwelwel]

I know that knights where so freightened by crossbows, because they couldn't defend against it in the early centuries, that the pope forbade the use of a crossbow against a fellow Christian. Despite of that decission, a lot of peasents and knights ignored that order.

[Point Blank]

Probably wasn't too smart of the French letting the English archers emplace their stakes again after they moved forward into archery range either, "OK lets attack recklessly, but first lets wait until after their stakes are in position "

[Vernah]

So we can assume, that all these weapons will pwn chain mail at close range, but what about at longer ranges?

Also, regarding early plate armor and late plate armor, what can the weapons do then? Also, regarding the longbow and bodkin, is it able to pierce plate at close range at all or is it just fail? Regarding the battles they were indeed in, getting shot by a longbow while in full plate armor, may not pierce but im sure it would cause random jolts in your body, like getting a kick in the face, etc. Your just marching away, in full plate armor trying to head towards the british nobility, then randomly on both sides, arrows start kicking your legs, arms, etc and make you lose balance.

What about composite, heavy xbow/steel xbow and arbalests? What are they able to pierce at close or longer ranges?

[Ichon]

The only advantage of longbow and most composite bow over other missile weapons as far as I know is rate of fire. An experienced bowman can fire 6 arrow a minute for quite some time. Faster even than that for shorter periods. Effective range from oblique fire is also decent... not for armor piercing but to hit horses and disrupt a charge. It is hard to crouch, hold lance, guide horse, and maintain position in charge while horses are being hit with arrows and knights knocked around by plunging fire even if it is not often penetrating their armor. Once the shock value of the charge can be partially negated or better armored knights become more vulnerable to counter charge or swarm of footmen. French at Agincourt did not have good combined arms force like the English and when the pride of their army the knights lost effectiveness there was not much left to do.

Crossbows could be lethal to armor but quite slow rate of fire and might only get 2 shots off before charge hits whereas in the same period of time longbow could get 6-10 depending on experience and skill of the bowman.

[Point Blank]

So we can assume, that all these weapons will pwn chain mail at close range, but what about at longer ranges?

Also, regarding early plate armor and late plate armor, what can the weapons do then? Also, regarding the longbow and bodkin, is it able to pierce plate at close range at all or is it just fail? Regarding the battles they were indeed in, getting shot by a longbow while in full plate armor, may not pierce but im sure it would cause random jolts in your body, like getting a kick in the face, etc. Your just marching away, in full plate armor trying to head towards the british nobility, then randomly on both sides, arrows start kicking your legs, arms, etc and make you lose balance.

What about composite, heavy xbow/steel xbow and arbalests? What are they able to pierce at close or longer ranges?

Some data:

Energy to defeat, in Joules:
Arrowhead vs. Buff Leather 30 J
Lance vs. Cuir-boulli 30-20 J
Lance vs. Padding (16 layers linen, 60g for 16 x 21 cm) 50 J
Arrowheads vs:
Modern Mail (mild steel) alone 80 J
Modern Mail & Jack Penetration 100 J
Modern Mail and Tailor's Dummy 100 J (Soar et al)
Modern Mail, Jack Penetration, and 35 mm penetration of Plastilene behind 120 J
15th c. Mail (low carbon steel hardened by quenching) two links broken and jack behind
completely penetrated: 120 J
1 mm mild steel plate (perpendicular impact) 55 J for 45mm penetration
1. 5 mm mild steel plate 110 J
2 mm mild steel plate 175 J
1.9 mm “Swedish” Wrought Iron 80-75 J

Energy delivered:
Stabbing:
Underarm: up to 63 J
Overarm: up to 115 J
2-Handed weapon: 150J
English bows:
70 lb bow: 52-55 J (Hardy)
70 lb bow: 46-47 J at 10 m
80 lb bow: 70-83 J (61 J at 50 m)
140 lb bow: 99-104 J (Calculated from Soar et al)

plus as I wrote above:

Roughly, and at very close range:
-Early 12th century crossbows: 110-140J
-Heavy Crossbows: 140-180J
-Steel crossbows: 180-220+
-Arbalests: 220J+
-Longbows: 80-100J
-Composite Bows: could be higher than longbows due to more efficiency due to construction, eg a 100lb Comp bow = approx a 120lb longbow
-Javelins: vary variable but probably in the mid 100's, remember all values are at close range.

[Vernah]

Thanks point blank, that's awesome! May I ask where you got the info from? I just wanna find some good books or info on these topics, here in London the info is pretty general that you'd find at the university library, etc haha.

[HighLord z0b]

So we can assume, that all these weapons will pwn chain mail at close range, but what about at longer ranges?

Actually I've seen differing results, riveted iron mail with good padding was actually quite good at protecting against arrows according to some tests I've seen.

Indeed, experiments undertaken by the Royal Armouries in Leeds have shown that when chain armour is outfitted on a free-flowing dummy, effectively mimicking the human body in motion, as it would be in a military engagement, it is almost impossible to penetrate using any conventional medieval weapon. Sword slashes are deflected, with spear, sword and arrow thrusts effectively stopped by the ring defenses. Even bodkin arrows are unable to penetrate the chain armour in these experiments. When layers of leather, felt or even cloth undergarments are added to the chain armour, the protection is even better. The results of these experiments are confirmed by the injuries recorded on medieval skeletons which have been excavated near battlefields or in medieval cemetries. These skeletons almost exclusively have wounds only to the head or limbs, the torsos remaining protected by armour. Taken from Kelly DeVries, "Medieval Military Surgery", Medieval History Magazine, Vol 1 is 4, December 2003.

Whilst I don't agree that it's "almost impossible to penetrate", I do think that the idea that bows could easily penetrate mail is an old one that is being revised.

[Point Blank]

I recommend a book titled 'The Knight and the Blast Furnace', its an extensive treatment on medieval armor, metallurgy and weapon effects vs that armor. Parts of it are on Google books. Try www.myarmoury.com also, plenty of good discussion on the forums.