I have never agreed so damn much with a random comment on youtube.

One of the best comments in history. 👍

Agree. This is what History channel USED to be, when it first started.

@uncletigger This! The constant repetition of the same point / clip on US documentaries makes them absolutely unwatchable

@@wbbartlett it makes me feel the narrator has no respect for my short term memory.

I just looked up Townsends, and I would like to give you a heartfelt thank you for informing me about them. The channel looks like a gold mine of the "everyday" and practical historical things I would love to know.

I've been watching Townsends for years, but I watch a lot different historical channels and due to the great KZfaq algorithm, I just found this channel today.

Thanks for suggesting the Townsend channel!! Hadn’t heard of it. Looks fantastic!

The townsends are great. Although I prefer Bjorn Andreas Bull Hansen and other period specific people. Americana is of no interest to me, it's well publicized. Germanic history of our peoples--as an Englishman whose family are listed in the Domesday book from the invasion in 1066--who didn't even know his people's ethnic group had a name as I grew up is far more important. Our history is actively suppressed, and what little is taught is modern colonial era and usually lumped with shame and Germanophobic racism.

@@bashkillszombies Dunno about it being actively supressed (though school was a long time ago) but starting at 1066 and then skimming through things definitely doesnt do the job. I think there's a temptation in some groups to try and desperately say us and germans are the same and it's us against the world, i'd dare to pitch our history against theirs and say we're different and better because of our medieval period and because of the colonial period. Everyone hates colonialism, nobody likes to talk about about how we all still reap the benefits - even now.

He’s pretty much the best interrogater I’ve ever seen.

Dude, that first arrow that deflected. Imagine being on the receiving end of that? Holy shit.

Somehow I suspect it is faked. I don’t know of any bow that makes a creak when drawn. I’m no expert but I suspect it is dramatic editing.

@@wb5plj its fake, ive heard the same FX in a game

Nicolas Lennman yea not surprised. I would never fire a bow that creaked. Bows don’t creak. Which means it is a lie, in a documentary, why would you lie in a documentary. It is just a total loss of credibility. Idiots! There are a lot of people whom don’t know better. So now there are a lot of people who think that a bow creaks and it is normal. Yep Lie.

@@Bringer222 From where do you think the sound effect was recorded?

Probably not that well. Modern archery rarely utilizes the kind of drawweight that is required to have a chance at piercing armour. Crossbows are a bit more interesting, they might do just as well as they did in the middle ages.

Darthplagueis13 ??? There are PLENTY of bows made today with 75+ draw weights. Compound and regular both. You’ll need to go to specialty shop or online to find them, but the archery and bow hunting scene is still thriving!

@@rykercabler9756 I'm not denying that. But the OP specifically asked about armour and warbows that might be able to pierce or significantly dent armour start around 130 and go all the way up to almost 200 lbs of drawweight. There's a significant power spike between a bow that can kill in general and a bow that might harm an armoured opponent. Noone would bring a 160 lbs bow for hunting and you don't need that kind of power for normal sports archery which is the reason why you won't really find a bow with that kind of drawweight today unless it is a replica of a medieval bow.

@@darthplagueis13 Modern compound bows are far more efficient at transferring energy to the arrow than longbows. This means that you wouldn't necessarily need the same draw weight in order to do the same amount of damage with a compound bow compared to a longbow.

@@darthplagueis13 The efficency of modern recurves & even more, compound bows are a lot greater than warbows, so a 180lb warbow would be equal to c 100 to 120lb compound, maybe less, & a 120-130lb warbow something like an 80lb compound. The modern materials & design outperform the best that medieval bowyers could acheive.

Jack Churchill

@Nim Boo Mad Jack Churchill, he was a commando. There is am amazing photo of him wadding ashore with a Broadsword in hand. He commenced an ambushed on a German patrol by shooting one of the enemy with an arrow. A google search will bring up more on him.

Rambo did it in the eighties. :-)

Vietnam actually .................

The Wikipedia entry says he went to war armed with a longbow, bagpipes and a Scottish broadsword. Of those, the bagpipes are surely the most terrifying lol.

My grandfather likened it to being hit with a baseball bat at full force from a major league player. Ididn't ever really believe him until i watched a demonstration showing the comparison between something with armor getting shot, and then getting hit with a bat.

It can rip your lungs and make you cough blood. That's a rather unsettling experience.

Was this 2007, we had a bloke into Bastion with something like that, he had, also sustained a left arm injury too, he laughed and said the Osprey was a life saver. tho the unit on this vid is not the Osprey model.

One of my officers got shot in the ass. We never stopped tormenting him with Forest Gump references.

There's actually a vid somewhere of a marine getting shot by a sniper, he dropped to the ground like he got hit by a wrecking ball, survived though with some body trauma

Thanks very much.

I would agree with you if they were as carefully selectful and detail orientated when it comes to picking 'period' armour, sorry but they seem to have found the rustiest piece of pseudosteel imaginable for this 'test'. It's a shame since they gave such a detailed description of the guns and such, without an equally detailed description of the 'armour' they were using (type of metal, period it came from etc) all of which is very important

Even world-builders and writers should watch these videos. It gives you plenty of ideas.

@@AeneasGemini and it didn't even penetrate the armour , making a hole doesn't mean anything if it isn't deep enough to even penetrate flesh

@@18IMAMGODINA Let's not forget they're working with stationary target. The real cavalry would have been charging at them with great momentum so combine the two with the bow's power then it would most definitely pierce them or worse pull their insides out if we want to be realistic.

Sorry to disagree but I have heard from several people that while in armor, a piercing strike to the body does not make you feel much, if anything, of course that is unless it penetrates enough to injure. Blunt force attacks to the body can definitely injure without any penetration, but arrows certainly do not have any real blunt force, you do not feel anything even from spear strikes powerful enough to dent the armor and push you backwards, that is from a first hand account. So, unless the arrows strike the helmet, I do not think the person would be hurt at all.

its even funnier when you know that, he is actually REALLY knowledgable about firearms, and has made video games like American Sniper

I'd rather be mowed down by an MG than face arrows hailing down lol. The MG will make sure you die, with the arrows it's a hippeti hoppeti of it might not kill you instantly, but get stuck or simply scratch you and you die from an infection. Bullets may seem worse but in most cases they are a clean shot, believe me, you do not want arrows flying at you with tips that have been drenched in feces before :P Yes, that was a thing. One cut and you are done for.

I would rather be the modern soldier with an M16 than the medieval knight charging him with a lance.

That wasn’t a fair comparison though because modern foot soldiers usually use plate carriers that have plates that cover almost all of the front sides and rear.

Modern soldiers have the advantage of using environmental cover liberally and as long as it suits them, which represents a huge change in warfare. I dare say if charging straight up to your enemy in the face of their fire was still a thing there would be higher standards in modern armor.

But it is a thing. That’s what tanks are best at! They are the modern cavalry. That said, charging straight at your enemy is definitely a last ditch or securing victory attempt.

You should check out Todd's Workshop here on youtube, he's made a video about this all about the Warbow vs Breastplate, and is working on another test for the near future! Definitely worth a watch!

"Please explain these magic boomsticks to me ."

That was a bit like 'I don't like weapons at all, this is too much for me'.. Wait a minute didn't I see you chop the top of a skull off from horseback in the other video just a moment ago?

@@joostdriesens3984 It came across more, to me, as someone genuinely curious about a field they're unfamiliar with trying to be respectful/ find the respectful way to ask the question. He's made it pretty clear he doesn't know guns (or bows) well. By definition guns are a type of machine so it's a fair term to use.

@@Samhwain I think linguistically a better broader term for gun is weapon or device or even tool. The term 'machine' sounds a little bit off for describing a rifle (even a machine gun!). That bothered me a bit and made him sound overly respectful, like 'I have no idea what I'm talking about'. It's largely a matter of perception though and I think he's a great guy, just to be clear.

100% agree. Firearm safety is just as important as marksmanship principles. If not more so. In the Australian army we place a huge emphasis on safety and muzzle awareness.

pretty sure he's one of the top longbow archers in the world, seems like every show gets him in when they need someone to demonstrate one.

practice practice practice practice..............

king james488 I’m far from one of the best in the world! But thank you for the compliment

TudorStephen I can assure you it’s 140lbs. This breast plate is one of Jason’s old jousting pieces. 1.5mm thick, carbon steel. It’s a VERY big ask for a Warbow

@@lukewoods2076: Why do you think this armour was penetrated (by some arrows at least) without much damage to the arrows? Comparing this test with the recent Tod's Workshop experiment, the results are wildly different (arrows in the latter demonstration pretty much all shatter and don't go through the breastplate at all with a 160lb bow). /watch?v=DBxdTkddHaE&t=1344s

i would LOVE to see him and Goe Gibbs shooting volleys together some time

I can't stand Joe Gibbs. His draw technique is really not that good. If he kept his draw weight to around 115lb and not 150lb or 170lb he would be much better to watch. This guys technique is incredible, its clearly a heavy bow but he draws it soo smoothly, and then takes a second or two to aim! If you watch Gibbs you can see he is starting to shake with the heavy bows, and he rushes each shot

Im just blown away by their strict gun laws. It's just crazy to me since I can walk to a store and buy a gun and a magazine. Not just load one bullet at a time lmao

I always do get a laugh out of video's that show poor saps from other countrys that don't allow firearms out at the range for the first time. If the time ever comes when people do need to pick up a weapon and defend themselves in those countries.. Those poor people are going to be shit out of luck. The entire point of the 2nd amendemnt is to give the common people the CHANCE to stand up and fight. Without said weapons they are nothing but one more body to put into the ovens of concentration camps.

@@Berzerk_Guy " I can walk to a store and buy a gun and a magazine" didn't guys do that and just kill en masse ? don't you guys have lots of gun violence ? doesn't happen in strict gun laws country Don't you think it's a bit silly you can just walk in a store and buy a weapon with which you can kill at range plenty of people before being stopped ? Don't bother I know all the pro gun arguments and non arguments, I undertand the benefits and the ideology behind it and I support it to an extent. but don't you think the actual crazy thing is that you can just buy such a thing so easily ? "Without said weapons they are nothing but one more body to put into the ovens of concentration camps" That's why there is a things called an "army". If a country invades another one, it's not the random poor people who defend their country, its the poor people in the army. IF the army gets defeated, the people can still get their hands on scavenged weapons ( ever heard of "la Resistance" ? or every guerilla ever ?) And if it's the government you're trying to defend yourself from, well, good luck fighting the army with their trained personel with their epic weaponery/tanks/helis/aircrafts/drones/etc with you rad taktikal skeleton ar15

@@escalator9734 Our military would not attack its own people, however, the gov't can amass an army comprised of non Americans who are not bound by oath to protect the country and its people. Btw, I am American.

ww2 buff yep, they’re extremely rare. Here’s the stats to prove it: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_United_States_in_2019 Scroll down to see the day by day info, and further down to see by month. It’s the 11th today so there may have been some change which may skew the info shown. I’m actually thinking it might be a full time job keeping this wiki page up to date.

I would like to have a more in depth analysis of the limitations in a tactical sense and in deployment because the English used a curiously defensive set up and infantry based warfare as their war doctrine in field battles compared to most other continental powers. Also distances would be nice. Thing is, horses pumped full of adrenaline charging with a herd (in line with other knights) can be hard to kill. Even later there are reports of horses seeming unaffected by several rifle rounds and not reliably going down so while we would consider that animal torture. You don't need many falling horses to disrupt a charge, but on the flipside not every arrow will stop a war horse either. The knights will however be very mad at how much their expensive horses get ruined by archers and quite a few might still die after a while.

@@mangalores-x_x seems like the infantry was cheaper and easier to deploy, along with archers, obviuslly. Most of the great battles at the time English Armies found theirselves out numbered by A LOT too. The long bow and clever commanders turned it in their favor tho. I know my comment is not too relevant to your point, sorry about that.

Horses were also often armoured, at least on the front. Flanking shots to the horse would probably have been more dangerous. Very similar to how modern infantry with anti-tank weapons engage modern tanks and AFVs.

An unmounted guy in a suit of armor would be slow,quickly exhausted& at no great advantage against an agile enemy, I would think.

@@MisdirectedSasha For the most part though arrows would be fired with the aim of coming down as vertical as possible therefore negating armour at the front.

Maybe Barska makes some awesome stuff in the UK only xD

@First Last L118A1.

Maybe they were consoling the AR for the abomination they turned it into.

It is an AICS stock but that's a Ruger or Savage action so its not a L118A1 its a look alike for film or TV use.

@First Last You never Rushed B I see, cyka blyat

Thanks for watching, don't feel guilty, we enjoy making them

Burning the priest and pissing on the bible

I think we just invented too many new ways of killing. Modern armor does nothing for anything more powerful than a gun. Not grenades, not land mines, not artillery, missiles, bombs, lasers, or nuclear weapons.

@@steamedcream7671 still hurts like a bitch Vests only stop it from going through you it still feels like your being hit by a sledge hammer

So true

We could make armour that is just as effective today, but it's a little expensive and weighs a lot. We do have the technology for power armour and prototypes do exist (I worked at an arms show and they were on display in 2011), but they cost too much for anything but specialist use. Generally, modern warfare for infantry is more just patrolling so an armoured vehicle gives them protection and the lack of being over armoured helps with public relations

@@sand0decker I think he is talking about armour efficiency in relation to the weapons of the day. In the late middle ages they had armour that was practical, usable and could protect you from almost anything the battlefield throws at you. In our modern age the killing power of weaponry has just advanced so much that full body armour would be ludicrously heavy and impractival (also, I very much doubt that ceramic would behave in a way that would allow you to move properly) to the point where all we can do is put the armour on a vehicle which overall has less moving parts and can carry significantly more than the human body. The plate armour of then are armoured vehicles today and the fact that we do nowadays need a vehicle on top means that back then armour was a lot more efficient.

actually modern battle is often far more brutal. i'm sure PTSD has always existed but there's a reason it has only been recently identified.

@@andyv4585 Not sure if I agree, but it's hard to measure in any meaningful way. I would think that the trauma of seeing somebody's skull bashed in by a mace (or being the one who did it) is pretty equal to seeing somebody die of gunshots or shrapnel...

But they are literally scary machines that do nothing but terminate things.

Apparently near the end of the 100 year war, knights would just face down and scrunch up a bit, and the longbows couldn't penetrate their armor.

@starshipeleven I'm curious as to that at well. The armour test done by Tods Workshop confirmed this with similar materials. However I'd be curious as to the exact specs for this equally cool video.

Which is just one of the reasons why crossbows started to replace longbows.

@@user-rd1hd3ww1b crossbows were at the same era with longbows actually (invented earlier, even), and less effective in terms of punching power. Except the fact that the users were far easier to be trained.

Or he didn't get hit by any arrows at all. Chances are against that. More than likely he was moving ahead of the wave if arrows .

For most Brits shooting a rifle is s big thing lol.

@Abu Troll al cockroachistan agree

5.56x45mm = you want that person dead within 400m (possibly 600m if using 77gr ammo) 7.62x51mm = you want that person over 800m there dead. .338 Lapua = you want that person over 2 miles away dead. .50 BMG= you want that person over 1 miles way and every non-hardened things along the projectile's path, dead.

@@muhammadnursyahmi9440 The longest confirmed sniper kill is at much lower distance than 2 miles. A bullet may travel that far, but it will be largely spent and highly unlikely to hit it's intended target.

No.

In my opinion the biggest difference is in the arrows used. Modern carbon fiber arrow with small sharp tip flies faster, tends to turn less and penetrates very well. Ive seen a video where a guy was shooting heavy mediaval windlass crossbow with draw weight over 1200pounds and comparing it to modern hunting crossbow with +- 200 pounds. The modern crossbow with carbon fiber bolt fully penetrated the targed used, while the old bulky bolt of the heavy crossbow struggled.

Carbon shafts break pretty easy against hard targets.

then it wouldn't be history.

That's not what the video was about. There are lots of other videos

The heaviest longbows could outperform the fastest modern compound bows in terms of kinetic energy. However, modern arrows are a lot thinner in diameter which enhances penetration and are made of stronger materials. I'm not sure if carbon fiber shafts are more durable than wooden ones, but FMJ shafts definitely are. A modern crossbow will outperform any medieval crossbow short of a ballista. Steel prods are very inefficient at transferring kinetic energy to the bolt, so even a 1200 lb arbalest will be inferior to a 200 lb compound crossbow in penetration. That's not even factoring in the latter's superior range, accuracy, and rate of shot (15 bolts per minute vs 2 bolts per minute for the arbalest).

It's the UK.

Norian Arijuna ?

@@Zemnmez This has many in the UK audience, who are unlikely to be well informed about firearms. While a bow is simple enough, a rifle may be relatively unknown.

@vin 950 Depends on the steel. Mild steel? That is worse than most medieval steels, for protection. It will certainly be true, as there are proof marks from muskets and the like later on.

Charles Balliet Not if you roll a natural 20.

@vin 950 Yeah I reckon an armourer would only do that early on, in order to prove the quality of their craftsmanship. If you're going to damage every piece of armour you make then that's just counter productive. You are slightly lowering the chances of the buyer's survival and also making the armour look less fashionable, a concern among wealthier fighters. I reckon armourers would have some old breastplate lying around full of dents that they'd bring out every time they needed to prove their skill for a new buyer.

@vin 950 a bit of note tho, most of (mass produce) modern reproduction armor are not hardened steel. meaning it look and weight the same like medieval armor but it not have the same hardness as the real one, because as a reproduction most of it use will only be a "costume" for reenactment purpose and it will be a lot cheaper to make and sell.

that grade of armor was for wealthy/ high status people. the other people probably got the off the rack stuff that was made as cheap as possible and ordered in thousands of sets

err no they were just dispatched and dumped in a hole.

Tbf 9x19 isn't the most effective round to hit kevlar with anyway. That said, thank God for ballistic vests.

exactly kevlar is rated to stop pistol rounds mostly while plates are there to stop rifle rounds

Matthew Chappell quite unfortunate, it seems to be barely half the size of American ceramic plates

Hi mate, nope not plod issue, def mil issue. I was issued this in the 90's , it was standard issue for Iraq too before the 'bean counters' in the MOD were forced to spend some money on better protection for the bods on the ground.

Police wear Kevlar only armor (level 3A) with the exception of teams like S.W.A.T and its foreign equivalents. Soldiers wear level 3 which is steel plates hardened to withstand up to 7.62x39mm ball. Arrows of any kind will not pen that and neither will knives. Overall I agree with you. The arrow wouldn't move a 170lb man in plate at all, there just is not enough mass in that ..what 1 1/2lb arrow.

@@techmarine83 This is also the thing: Police range from 2A-3A. from FMJ 9mm to three (or was it five?) hits of .44 Semi Wad Cutter. Some police will wear L3 ceramic hard armor, which is good for six hits of M80 7.62x51mm FMJ. Military operatives wear much heavier ceramic plate, exceeding L4 in all cases today, from Russian GRANIT to US ESAPI REV G. 7.62x39mm FMJ isn't honestly that hard to defeat. The round is mediocre already, and it's slow enough that 7.62x39mm MSC can often be defeated against milspec soft armor helmets.

Thank you very much!

the point was to look at the longbow and contrast it with a modern gun, but I agree, more period firearms would be nice to feature...

I know there were some rifles back then, but it is more accurate to say matchlock muskets, and wheel lock muskets.

That takes funding and persuasion to get collection holders to risk their expensive antiques for a fairly uncredited contribution. A relatively small channel like this doesn't have the public clout or reputation to warrant museums to take that risk.

@@artemisfowl52 You don't need antiques, there are plenty of reproductions of black powder weapons from various eras out there. All you would need to do is find a reenactment group that reenact the appropriate period that has repro guns.

Maybe interesting to see but similar results I imagine. There's a reason the armor disappeared soon after even the period firearms came on the field. It just wasn't effective against them.

Glad you enjoyed it!

There are a few tbf. I have practiced with some bows myself, and crossbows. Crossbows are easier ofc, but bows feel stronger (mainly due to the draw and strength).

Yeah but it's just not the same as going to a gun range in America because UK gun laws are a joke and don't let you have anything fun they even neuter your rifles by making you have to load every round after you shoot

@@nerofoxkrell it's quite the shame now isn't it? I've heard they're trying to ban kitchen knives and even ID checking people to buy plastic utensils in some places as the gun laws did nothing to prevent gun crime and murders. It actually exasperated the problem because now the average citizen has lost the ability to defend themselves

it kind of makes me wish that Trump would let America lead to conquest of the United kingdom and make them a state just to save its citizens from their incompetent Parliament

@@nerofoxkrell idk if I'd go that far with it but I do think they need to take their land back. Governments are supposed to be for the people by the people.

for having shot both muskets and 308 rifles, i think the musket would do even more damage. 308 kicks like a mule and hits like a freight train, but muskets loaded for war kick even harder with a heavier projectile. there's a reason armor was abandonned in the 18th century: your plate cuirass only makes your corpse weigh more.

I think skall has a video doing this with various helmets

UK cringe mandates, I know! Males me proud to be in the USA!

lol, thanks

Depends on how wealthy you were :D ... 1 year

@Mike -_- Litoris LMAO yea it did

@Mike -_- Litoris Multi-National Force Iraq (MNFI) 04 & 05 and Multi-National Coalition Iraq (MNCI). Camp victory, international zone/ green zone (lol, nothing green about it) had British contingents we worked with (among others), convoys, joint missions, OP’s etc. the joke was that the Queen had all the organs except the heart and America had a bad healthcare system and had no organs for replacement. That’s why it was bigger. I also said how much I liked the bull pup rifle they had and that was met with criticism. They didn’t like it very much for some reason.

@Mike -_- Litoris since I shared, how about you? Where were you and who did you work with? Especially with such a comment of “A LOT more advanced”. I witnessed first hand both armor sets working just fine....

Do you think that extra 50mph will do that much of a difference?

@@m-sinan well, I would think so, if you were charging directly against the arrow. At the very least, it would surely disencourage you a bit

The speed of the rider shouldn’t make much difference, you need to take into account the enormous speed of the arrow. Also I don’t think they charge and shoot at 50mph…

b-b-b-but the chain links were serious =)

@@ButlerianG-Haddinun ya, i saw the riveted chainmail

Not even. I've had cookie tins, and I've tested hand weapons against them. Improvised, but still. I'd bet on five of them stacked up stopping an arrow.

@@KoishiVibin That depends on the bow. A warbow of the draw weight shown here? No way do those tins stand a chance. Take a look at this: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/erZ0nZuX3d3QiqM.html That went right through a 55 gallon steel drum, front and back, and was still moving pretty fast. The ridiculous part is the tip it was using; instead of a sharp tip that's good at penetration, they were using one of these: www.3riversarchery.com/the-hammer-screw-in-small-game-blunts.html Blunt points blowing right through between 1.8 mm and 3 mm total thickness of steel is a lot more impressive than your five tins. That's more like 1 or 2 mm, and divided into thinner pieces which will make it easier to penetrate.

Yea, and it's not its because of its fictional ability to penetrate proper hardened steel armor.

@Please Complete All Fields bows are no less effective than early firearm, the latter were used for the moral shock it brings, but musket in Neapoleon era could effectively outperform bows while having similar range and accuracy(while sacrificing rof, but thats not a big issue)

But it had trouble when facing a family of arrogant squirrels

@@ctakitimu I'd reckon considerably less so than when faced with a flock of vociferously clamorous geese.

Your calculations may be misleading. Even if the energy between both projectiles is comparable, penetration capability depends greatly on the point of impact and the velocity of the projectile. Any bullet with the same energy of an arrow will have far greater penetration potential than the arrow itself.

@@fernando47180 Also cross-section and relative hardness. For example, a class 3A kevlar vest will stop any handgun in common usage, but that arrow would go right through it. NIJ class 1 armor will only stop things like .22LR with soft lead bullets and .32 caliber snubby pocket pistols shooting wadcutters or hollow points. Nobody even bothers to make it any more. This plate seems like it might be about on that level. Not technically quite useless, but also probably not worth the weight to wear since all but the weakest pistols would penetrate it easily. For that matter, the heavy crossbows of later periods would likely give it some trouble as well.

Thanks.