10-12-2009, 09:56 AM
Scott wrote:
...whilst I have no doubt of the value of the trials you conducted, I fear you may have started with some invalid assumptions. To begin with, neither shields, helmets, nor body-armour were ever intended to "stop any impact from any arrow...etc" - rather they were designed to be a balance between protection, weight, expense etc; a compromise in fact, as ever, between offence and defence.
Secondly, what sort of energy of weapons/penetrating power etc did you assume would be "encountered on an ancient battlefield" ?
Quote:but this was based on our assumption that a 1 cm thick piece of armor (however many layers it would require to reach this thickness) would be sufficient enough to stop any impact from an arrow likely to have been encountered on an ancient battlefield.
...whilst I have no doubt of the value of the trials you conducted, I fear you may have started with some invalid assumptions. To begin with, neither shields, helmets, nor body-armour were ever intended to "stop any impact from any arrow...etc" - rather they were designed to be a balance between protection, weight, expense etc; a compromise in fact, as ever, between offence and defence.
Secondly, what sort of energy of weapons/penetrating power etc did you assume would be "encountered on an ancient battlefield" ?
"dulce et decorum est pro patria mori " - Horace
(It is a sweet and proper thing to die for ones country)
"No son-of-a-bitch ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country" - George C Scott as General George S. Patton
Paul McDonnell-Staff
(It is a sweet and proper thing to die for ones country)
"No son-of-a-bitch ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country" - George C Scott as General George S. Patton
Paul McDonnell-Staff
