NOBODY EXPECTS THE SPANISH IANQUISITION!

Michael Gill lmfao

SPANISH INQUISITION RESTARTS DURING OPERATION MICHAEL

@@dmgill83 dammit I was going to pull that joke.

Jay Steele the thing is, the armor worn by the conquistadors probably were more effective and had more shoulder room for a rifle

mickeybill Yes, he is.

Forgotten Weapons I have never been more jealous in my life!

Daniel Taylor Simpson Ltd has more or them. LOTS more... kzfaq.info/get/bejne/ociUnpN8mJvMYKs.html

mickeybill Yeah. Wonder why they cost so much? Yeah, jerks at Simpson Ltd have about 120000000x10^8 lugers.

mickeybill Actually laughed when I seen it all. To be honest, I don't find much appeal in Lugers, although I UNDERSTAND why people like them. I prefer my Webley Mk.VI, though I would of course want some of those contraptions from back in the day that help in quickly reloading them.

The Great War Glad you liked it! We followed this up with some ballistic testing on reproduction armor, which you can see here: www.full30.com/video/de2b44d88992230423dfb0c7a5ef9374

Forgotten Weapons Will do, thanks.

The Great War, Indy and Ian should join forces and do a special episode! A counter attack of information to the masses of inquiring minds that seek to expand our knowledge of history!! The I's have it!

Indy

Brings me joy that y’all are KZfaq friends

Lol "this is a Kevlar vest. archaic right? this wouldn't stop a high energy particle beam from a kids toy. but this was the highest level tech available for Frontline troops."

And kevlar is already getting old as we speak.

Well, kevlar vests are just a modernized version of fabric armor. Fabric armor, such as gambesons, is the single most universal and important piece of armor in human history, also one of the most effective too. Padded garments like gambesons were worn to battle by pretty much everyone everywere in every historical era since the paleolithic, because stacking a bunch of layers of fabric has always been the most efficient method of saving your ass from projectiles and blades. In the history of armors, steel plates are overrated.

Well as of 2017 our armour is pretty damn good. You can encase your entire ribcage in rifle-stopping steel or ceramic. In terms of "what's trying to kill me" versus "what can I wear to dissuade that" modern troops are as protected as soldiers in antiquity or the medieval ages.

Mako Reizei Girls und Panzer character ^

To think that, even in antiquity and the middle ages, peasants would still wear effective armor (gambesons and such) when called to arms. But during modernity, lower-class human lives were comparatively seen as disposeable. It took a while for technological development of armor to have the incentive to really catch up to that of weapons; and it basically involved going back to gambesons, quilted layers of fabric, or plate. (BTW, "modernity" as a historical period means between the late 17th and early 20th centuries. Late 20th century was not modernity anymore, modernity ends in the early 20th century and we enter the _contemporary_ historical era. Like, Descartes was a modern thinker, whilst Foucault was contemporary.)

For what it's worth, these days, soldiers are usually given pretty good protection. It was maybe 1914 to 1975 that infantry was poorly protected and disposable, with the only real protection being helmets (which, in fairness, have probably saved a million people over the last hundred years, minimum). Since then, we've developed armors and stuff capable of actually keeping you, if not 100% safe, at least prevent you from dying when you get shot. If you're really lucky, you'll just get a nasty bruise and have to get some new gear, but more often you'll just get some broken bones and go to the hospital for a while as a result.

They didn't have the means to make effective armor in the early 20th century, the bullets were too powerful for traditional metal armor to be viable and they had no means to make anything more advanced. Helmets were designed to prevent deaths from artillery strikes and continue to be used for that purpose today, serving much the same purpose that hardhats serve to construction workers: namely preventing falling debris from cracking your skull open.

The armor when shot by a rifle created spalling and shrapnel and deforming the bullet, making it do more damage. Pistols worked

During WWI there were several attempts to develop and use personal armor. Particularly by observers and "snipers" going into No Mans Land between the battle lines. At first these worked well, then soldiers on both sides sent messages home requesting to have their Big Game hunting rifles sent to them on the front. The Big Game rifles had enough power to punch through the steel armor (being light enough for one or two men to carry) and fairly soon the attempts to use armor was dropped because steel was much to heavy to use when you had to move forward, or backward. Remember, the standard battle rifles of the day were 30.06 (US), 303 British (UK) 7.92 Gewar 98 (German). All of these cartridges generate more kinetic energy than the Intermediate 5.56x41mm or 7.62x39mm commonly used in todays military. Even today, body armor strong enough to stop these rifle rounds are much to heavy for a soldier on foot to wear / carry all day long. The USA could use them in the "War on Terror" only because the soldiers rode in vehicles to the battle site, dismounted for patrols, firefight, then got back in their vehicles to move to the next position. Battle field body armor is mostly to protect you from shrapnel and indirect fire. Though it is proven to save many lives, which is why you always wear your helmet.

Douglas West Oh, that one went over my head.

Bart Bols That went right over your head by a long shot.

***** artillery...long shot....do you get it now?

Quinten Sarn lol

+Martin Willett lol for you...

nice

Nice pun but Artillery was mainly used for taking out other artillery or tanks, rarely used for infantry

oh they did... heck, they'd barrage front trenches of the enemy side before their own infantry try to assault it for this, they can expend ludicrous number of shells and you can read various records of WW1 describing the hell on earth these barrage creates to the front trench (and the infantry hiding inside it) even in WW2 where trenches are not as common, artillery are still used extensively to wipe out infantries, both against infantry in open or infantry in defensive position. artillery were in fact not particularly effective against tanks, and far more useful against soft targets like infantry because artillery shells usually need a direct hit to cause non superficial damage to tanks (unless the artillery shell is absolutely massive) which is why anti tank guns were created, since the best way to kill tanks really was to fire high velocity armor piercing shell directly at the tank... not by using high explosive shell indirectly.

Iono Sama artillery then was just sending a bunch of mortars and hoping it kills a big number, they werent accurate, just highly deadly and something you dont want to be under

Thomas Anderson not entirely the heavy artillery yes they were not accurate, but no that did not stop both sides from using them heavily to bombard the trenches and infantry concentration, a job they in fact do a lot judging from the shells they expended for operations in some operations u read in WW1 history for example, the heavy artillery can fire incredulous number of shells in a relatively short duration to soften up forward defenses (trenches, fortifications, troops etc) and the second type of artillery of course were the light artillery like field guns etc... these were much more accurate than the heavy artillery as they fire in a more direct manner lobbing either high explosive or shrapnel shells... VERY deadly not surprisingly since they were much more accurate and were intended to smash most things containing infantry.. be it their trench points, machine gun locations, fortifications of any kind, or massed infantry assault (which with shrapnel shells will basically turn into swiss cheese in an instant if the gun can be brought to bear in time and placed correctly)

Top bit of info. Thank you.

Arno Schmidt It's still the company logo to this day.

ArkadiBolschek Only as part of the ThyssenKrupp concern. upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/de/8/8c/ThyssenKruppLogo.svg

Arno Schmidt Exactly! ^^

Arno Schmidt 6:00

Lars van Wijgerden and thus the mp18 was born

A Lange Pistole 08 would be good.

With that armor, shit give this man sword and shield!

I'm sure a lot of soldiers have asked that throughout history, with minor difference in context and language.

Flashbacks to Avanti Savoia

Mr. Mars Experience Dude, look up Simpson Ltd... they literally have a storage room FULL of Lugers. Christ, they basically cornered the market. There are a lot in this video, but its nothing compared to them. I think Ian actually did a tour of their facility once? Older video I think, but im sure i saw it?...

sergeantbigmac i hate when companies or people do that, buy up all of certain guns or ammo to artificially restrict the market and make the prices jump up

Mr. Mars Experience Ya I agree entirely, but it is cool to see their collection. Its the biggest im aware of anyway...

Mr. Mars Experience Like Diamonds

We all would have done it if we had the chance. I heard that when you can sell food you destroy it to increase the prife. I'd just storage it until the price is right (like grains, I'm not talking about food that spoils)

And only 40 million people had to die to accomplish that! Go, Krupp! x)

+Funny Farmer French Cuirassiers still had breastplates and helmets at the beginning of WW1.

+Mathias Bartl Mounted Prussians and Polish troops going back even before and later during the Napoleonic wars had steel plated cuirass with a similar goals. They were even given a bullet test before being distributed as a quality control test that it would work.

Kinda crazy that Europeans used to wrap themselves in full plate armor only to abandon that once guns came around and then to put armor plates on once again lol

When you include cavalry, armor plate never really stopped. Considering cav is going to be lesser in number (because it requires more training, more resources, etc.) than infantry, not to mention their vital role as flankers/fast attack units, armoring your cavalry to some extent was a logical step, especially against smaller, slower projectiles (pistols, shrapnel, etc.). This has continued into the modern day, only not in the form of horse-mounted cavalry but rather armored vehicles, both IFV/APC types of things and of course the tank.

kzfaq.info/get/bejne/oMt5eth01MydZ3U.html

+Jonathan Hansen They are air vents.

maybe to attach helmet covers, extra armor, face gaurd, or gas mask fittings. Thatd be my guess

@@jackapgar5824 Correct, it served as both ventilation holes and the points where you would attach a brow plate. The latter intention was abandoned in the ww2 era when stahlhelms were manufactured with shorter ventilation holes, and the holes were eventually ditched with the Bundesgrenzschutz' M53 stahlhelm.

Or just didn't notice, I imagine with the whole 'getting shelled and shot at', carefully inspecting your opponent's helmet is not high on your shopping list.

@@jabloko992 Yeah i was going to say, you'll probably be in some state of shock if you've just stormed enemy trench positions lmao, you probably don't notice too many details

"Hello, i'm Ian. Thank you for tuning in to another video of "Forgotten Armour dot com" and what i have for you today is a very nice japanese "Do Maru" set of armour..."

@@leximatic fucking weebs

Just go to metatron

Bri ish?

Sappe is an old term for ditches in sieges.

Augschburgball You mean the central powers.

I know the tank crews of the English army had a mask with steel shutters across the eyes and a mail mouth cover, just as a bit of protection from gunfire and shrapnel. Chain mail or hauberks were likely not used due to them really not being effective against piercing weapons (like bullets).

@@codeydewey8924 they were only used against fragmentation of the tanks armor it it was hit on the outside and splinter of it were flying around inside... reason simple enemy concentrate fire on vision slit there were some crazy designed masks for tanker in ww1 c8.alamy.com/compde/pb9ye9/der-tank-crew-gepanzerte-maske-pb9ye9.jpg

Axis = WW2 Entente = WW1

Retardeano central powers = WW1 Allies = WW2

Moridian iron guard

It's not that the historical accuracy that the armour was used but its effectiveness.

But the dude who wore it was from Italy and it was way more armor than these two pieces. AND he also took rifle shots point blank. (In the campaign for how short it was)

And then Bf V arrived and everyone started thinking that Bf 1 was accurate weirdly enough xD

@@antondemeyer5755 no no, nobody thought that...

Anyone who plays any of the Battlefield series and expects realism is going to be sorely disappointed.

Knechtor The Russians used armour in WW2 aswel, looks similar to this, shocktroops used this mostly.

Dimitri Petrenko Yeah the SN-42 could stop a pistol bullet pretty reliably in closer ranges and was because of this very effective in close combat, they used them a lot in Stalingrad. They were too heave to use out in the fields though.

bami2 I know, but i meant the modern application of Bodyarmour.

bami2 irrelavant comment... obviously we are talking about modern combat in which you would not often see bodyarmour which makes that the more interesting...

so I'm looking at world war 1 videos and such after purchasing battlefield 1 and doing research for the sake of enjoying history...and find a comment from one of Bubblegum Gun and Pepito Flores' anime shitpost friends having a regular discussion about history. whatta ya know

Jason Armstrong haha yeah we're at the same exact spot basically xD

A barrel-chested German machinegunner who had to carry all his equipment would have been the first choice

@@jonathanwells223 almost certainly named Gunther or Wolfgang

No such thing

Make the ears ring fo sho

That would fuckin suck but you would be alive

@@michaelkeha Probably, probably

@Simo Only if the recoil of the weapon would have broken your neck as well.

@@MartinTraXAA Considering it's very frontheavy, that will probably stop some of the whiplash.

This is complete bullshit and an urban legend.

that's a lie first off all, since the brow armor is so heavy in the front, it probably is able to catch and reduce the whiplash (inertia)

MyMRT1 Thanks!

It is better to be miserable for the emperor than miserable for yourself!

A gorget is a seperate piece of armor worn around the throat, not something built into the breastplate. It fills much the same role and there were some earlier breastplates with comperable features, but they're not the same thing.

The viewer

hickock

noone There was some variation between different models, but they were between 19 and 24 pounds. The reproduction set I have is right at 20.

Forgotten Weapons compared to modern armor...Not too horrible...I think our IBA body armor in the Army weighed 40lbs plus helmet, rifle and our pack...Something like that would be interesting in AR500 lol...

GrOuNdZeRo7777 if that were made in ar500 or even better 650 i could see it still being very useful for gunners on vehicles or something like that.

+Clueless Nitwiticus Bullets tend to all come from the same direction though.

+Clueless Nitwiticus it would be useless. but the Germans where innovators every one copy's them or learns from there mistakes. I know they use steel plate in armor now about the same thickness like AR500. but i don't know how they make them, i don't think there straight steel like they say.

+Rhys4190111 it's powder pressure welded steel, the only way to incorporate heavy and lighter elements together as a compound. very hard shit.........

well they would have a large Mound of dirt behind them from the digging of the trench

+Clueless Nitwiticus It would be pointless... Unless the shrapnel was coming at you from the front.. That is 50-50 chance of shrapnel injury.. I'll take that over 100% chance of shrapnel

What kind of chainmail was it?

Dániel Deák funny enough the term stormtrooper was coined during WWI because of the shock troopers of the German Army.

manictiger source?

Nack Jicholson I spent 5 seconds typing: "ww1 sniper backwards bullet" into Google. You should try that. And yes, it is dangerous and did sometimes backfire; but it was a thing both sides did in WW1. They eventually made specialized overpressure rounds with steel-cores which were slightly safer and more effective.

+VERY NIIICE they actually did that, especially against tanks early on as they didnt had any other means to fight them, the thing about it was that it was very dangerous and could if you were unlucky kill you instead

Nah. Armour from the past is far better to wear.....isnt heavy and doesnt restrict your movement(there were cutouts to shoulder the weapons.) and rested on the waist which makes them really light on the wearer(and they werent as thick as this on). This german one is much heavier and thocker and hangs from shoulders.....which is a terrible design

+adam foye and then fireing them both off simultanously as the you get hit but nothing can pen you but eventually someone manages it and you fall to the ground as you pull the triger of both lugers for the last time, it suddenly goes slowmo you can see the catridges slowly dropping down into the dust reflecting the sun of the light as you drop on the floor, the foe that just hit you landing next to you. the camera zooms out and goes black. do you mean like that?

+Freya Valentine That imagery needs John Woo's white doves taking flight, as he dives into the trench with dual Lugers, shooting six Frenchmen before landing in mud.

+Hassiri the khajiit Trying to find out what the armour is in the trailer as well lol.

+TheSpongeyFrog I can't speak for the whole armor set (probably fantasy), however his helmet is reminiscent of a sniper mask.

+TheSpongeyFrog just Google ww1 armor, that knight armor was real it was a design for arm armor

Sirees333 That sounds dubious, at best.

kokofan50 it may sound like but that's the truth. consider the weigh of the armor addon and the amount of kinetic force on the bullet impact. humans neck doesn't have enough strength in most cases to sustain that amount of power

Emanicas well... problems do not really paint the full picture =DD if your lucky - you get knocked out by the kinetic blast, if not a broken neck

Sirees333 the weight of the helmet would counteract the strike of the bullet, not enhance it. That's physics.

Sirees333 Bullets don't have that much kinetic energy. People can punch and kick with more force than bullets. What makes bullets so dangerous is that the energy is concentrated into a small area.