Silk Stats?

[Black Omega]

20 layers of linen did well enough too - the arrow might penetrate it, but it allowed a lot of people to get back up.

Did the mongols ever face anything like the Welsh longbow though? Even silk has limits...

At the risk of starting a flame war...yes. The long bow, typically made of yew, but also elm and other types of wood, was an excellent weapon. Depending on sources it was dangerous out to 200 yards. Based on the few samples left from the period when thge long bow was supreme the draw weight was around 80 to 90 pounds, with a 70% transfer of energy based on the design.

Leaving out other designs and simply referring back to the Mongols, their recurved, composite bow was shorter but because of a superior design that transferred more like 90% of the energy, the range and hitting power was similar. Though I've often found references on the internet to mongol bows having a draw weight of 150-166 pounds, I've never taken this very seriously.

 

[Xeriar]

At the risk of starting a flame war...yes. The long bow, typically made of yew, but also elm and other types of wood, was an excellent weapon. Depending on sources it was dangerous out to 200 yards. Based on the few samples left from the period when thge long bow was supreme the draw weight was around 80 to 90 pounds, with a 70% transfer of energy based on the design.

Are you referring to the Welsh bow?

Henry VIII decreed that noone over the age of 24 could practice at less than 220 yards, and that the typical extreme range was 400 yards, with draw weights between 120 and 180 pounds for a good heartwood bow.

Leaving out other designs and simply referring back to the Mongols, their recurved, composite bow was shorter but because of a superior design that transferred more like 90% of the energy, the range and hitting power was similar. Though I've often found references on the internet to mongol bows having a draw weight of 150-166 pounds, I've never taken this very seriously.

That's a lot but then again Mongols weren't small people. Though, I'm not sure how well that kind of draw weight could be handled on horseback.

 

[CombatWombat51]

1) Thanks everyone for the silk info. I was pretty sure that silk had it's strengths, but I like when people confirm my thoughts with facts

2) Although lost souls aren't unique to me, yes I'm Mortuus Solidus on SDH.

3) Hey, Brother Shatterstone, thanks for that heads up on evil cyberstreet. Gosh, I think I've been using that link, um, forever

 

[Brother Shatterstone]

3) Hey, Brother Shatterstone, thanks for that heads up on evil cyberstreet. Gosh, I think I've been using that link, um, forever

Yeah the whole board was moves a few months back and most of the oddities are caused by the old cyberstreet. I bet your working better than ever.

 

[Black Omega]

Are you referring to the Welsh bow?

Well, contintal longbows were usually more around 4 feet. According the source like the Mary Rose wreck, 5 and 6 feet Om the other hand, if you are going to suggest the welsh bow is far better than the english longbow, I'll have to ask for your source.

Charles Oman (History of the Art of Warfare in the Middle Ages) and John E Morris (Welsh Wars of Edward I) defintely connect the two, with no difference in strength commented on. Though this is difficult to measure since there are no examples of the welsh bow left.

Other scholars (Heath, Munksgaard) have even pounced on a mis translation by Morris (later used by Oman) and made the case the English longbow's design probably was not even based on the Welsh bow. Not sure I'd go this far though.

Henry VIII decreed that noone over the age of 24 could practice at less than 220 yards, and that the typical extreme range was 400 yards,

We're not even really disgreeing here. Practice range and extreme range are not the same as effective range, especially with the heavy bodkin arrows not used in practice. Hardy's 'Longbow: A Social and Military History' places to range of the bodkin arrow at 250 yards, with the effective range a little less.

with draw weights between 120 and 180 pounds for a good heartwood bow.

I suspect you place a little more faith in this translating strictly to modern weights and measures than I do. The most optimistic assessements of surviving longbows place the draw weight at 100-150. Count M. Mildmay Stayner, Recorder of the British Long Bow Society, put it at a maximum of 90-110 pounds. Mr. W.F. Paterson, Chairman of the Society of Archer-Antiquaries, placed it even a little lower.

Interestingly, this is not even dealing with heartwood bows. all surviving examples of the longbow are selfbows made from a mix of sapwood and heartwood, sapwood for spring, heartwood for the inside of the curve because it resisted compression better.

That's a lot but then again Mongols weren't small people. Though, I'm not sure how well that kind of draw weight could be handled on horseback.

The Mongol's used two types of bow. the smaller horse bow had a maximum range of 500 yards but the arrow was obviously lighter and less dangerous. The heavier bow was used while standing still on horseback, or more likely dismounted. It's effectiveness against the heavily armored knights was proven more than once. At Wahlstadt they annihilated a force of Knights Templer to the man.

So to answer the previous question, yes the Mongols encountered a bow that could match the longbow.

 

[Xeriar]

Well, contintal longbows were usually more around 4 feet. According the source like the Mary Rose wreck, 5 and 6 feet Om the other hand, if you are going to suggest the welsh bow is far better than the english longbow, I'll have to ask for your source.

I just refer to it as Welsh because, as I understand it, that's where most of the archers came from.

Charles Oman (History of the Art of Warfare in the Middle Ages) and John E Morris (Welsh Wars of Edward I) defintely connect the two, with no difference in strength commented on. Though this is difficult to measure since there are no examples of the welsh bow left.

Other scholars (Heath, Munksgaard) have even pounced on a mis translation by Morris (later used by Oman) and made the case the English longbow's design probably was not even based on the Welsh bow. Not sure I'd go this far though.

We're not even really disgreeing here. Practice range and extreme range are not the same as effective range, especially with the heavy bodkin arrows not used in practice. Hardy's 'Longbow: A Social and Military History' places to range of the bodkin arrow at 250 yards, with the effective range a little less.

The training distance makes sense then, I guess. I've heard some say the range was 700 yards - but that was clearly on high ground.

I suspect you place a little more faith in this translating strictly to modern weights and measures than I do. The most optimistic assessements of surviving longbows place the draw weight at 100-150. Count M. Mildmay Stayner, Recorder of the British Long Bow Society, put it at a maximum of 90-110 pounds. Mr. W.F. Paterson, Chairman of the Society of Archer-Antiquaries, placed it even a little lower.

Interestingly, this is not even dealing with heartwood bows. all surviving examples of the longbow are selfbows made from a mix of sapwood and heartwood, sapwood for spring, heartwood for the inside of the curve because it resisted compression better.

Since I don't know if stronger bows would make any difference in longevity, I will let the point stand. The english were in a less 'bow-friendly' environ than the Mongols were.

The Mongol's used two types of bow. the smaller horse bow had a maximum range of 500 yards but the arrow was obviously lighter and less dangerous. The heavier bow was used while standing still on horseback, or more likely dismounted. It's effectiveness against the heavily armored knights was proven more than once. At Wahlstadt they annihilated a force of Knights Templer to the man.

Actually as I read it, their arrows didn't do any good against the knight's armor either - they just shot the horses.

Amusing since IIRC the English did much the same against French knights in the hundred years war.

 

[Black Omega]

The training distance makes sense then, I guess. I've heard some say the range was 700 yards - but that was clearly on high ground.

I suppose you take a powerful enough bow, a very light arrow designed for range, and a cliff. It does reach a point of making no difference since at extreme ranges the arrow would do no real damage.

Since I don't know if stronger bows would make any difference in longevity, I will let the point stand. The english were in a less 'bow-friendly' environ than the Mongols were.

Longevity was always an issue with the longbow. Not in the short term, but hundreds of years later very few samples have survived. The Mary Rose bows were recovered from underwater, from the shipwreck. Finding the others was happy chance.

Actually as I read it, their arrows didn't do any good against the knight's armor either - they just shot the horses.

Amusing since IIRC the English did much the same against French knights in the hundred years war.

Depends on the reading, I suppose. Though this was a tactic well suited to Agincourt, given the mud. Drop a knight in plate into waist deep mud and watch him sink...A few of the english knights even suffered this fate.

 

[Xeriar]

I suppose you take a powerful enough bow, a very light arrow designed for range, and a cliff. It does reach a point of making no difference since at extreme ranges the arrow would do no real damage.

It's still an arrow falling from cos 30-60 degrees or so times the maximum range. If this gets to be over a few hundred yards, the arrow is falling in excess of 200 mph.

Depends on the reading, I suppose. Though this was a tactic well suited to Agincourt, given the mud. Drop a knight in plate into waist deep mud and watch him sink...A few of the english knights even suffered this fate.

Subotai's tactics were to stretch them out and smash their sides. Plate armor is very effective against arrows, in that it takes a direct hit (less than a 30 degree angle) to penetrate - otherwise the arrows just bounce off.

Although this is largely from accounts during the 100-Years War, which was somewhat later I think.

 

[Christian]

It's still an arrow falling from cos 30-60 degrees or so times the maximum range. If this gets to be over a few hundred yards, the arrow is falling in excess of 200 mph.

Doubt it. An object as light as an arrow is subject to significant drag ... I haven't been able to find any definitive calculations on the web, but my best estimate is for a terminal velocity in the range of 50-100 mph for an arrow. A flight arrow, which gives the best range, will actually have a lower terminal velocity ... An arrow's maximum speed will be reached as it leaves the bow-even after it reaches the peak of its arc, it will still be slowing down.

 

[Thaniel]

You should all check out Nexia Biotechnology's website. They are the creators of BioSteel. They genetically engineered goats to create spider silk. Pretty nifty.