HI
I though about this before, just a conversion with my friend though about creating a time machine to travel back
in time to fight a medieval warrior...is just a joke. I've heard of the people were short back then, and even a viking is
only about 5 foot 8 or 9, maybe because they work out when they are young and they can't grow. Perhaps their weapon is
really heavy so they won't move that fast, so depends on PT time they do, maybe I mean...
Jin
| Kyro R. Lantsberger wrote: |
| I like the talk of ruckmarching......it does seem that the best open field runners dont have the same skillset necessary to move quickly with a pack. |
Good analogy. I think a man-at-arms, accustomed to training and fighting in armour, would have been in the same kind of shape as a soldier today who rucks well. He might not be the fastest runner, but he would have strong legs and excellent endurance. Some of the battles - during which armoured men fought on foot - lasted several hours. I think that's roughly analogous to completing a 12-mile ruck at about a 15:00/mile pace, with some runs thrown in here and there that would correspond to the more intense action. I'm guessing harness would be more comfortable and easier to move in than, say an ALICE ruck, thanks to the weight distribution. But it would not breathe nearly as well.
| Jan Downs wrote: |
| Boucicault was famous for his fitness regimen which including running and doing pull ups in armour. |
My hero. If you go to Crossfit.com you can find one of their daily workouts, which was invented by the late SEAL LT Mike Murphy. He'd wear his body armor for the following workout, to be completed for time: 1-mile run, 100 pull-ups, 200 push-ups, 300 squats, 1 mile run. I've never even tried it :eek: but I have done some short sprints and a few pull-ups wearing an IBA (18.6 pounds with the plates) and can see that the "Murph" would be quite a challenge.
Regarding the swimming in armour thing, I've had to go through survival swimming but some of that gear was buoyant, so I don't know how long a person could keep his head above the water with a full harness. I'd wager not more than a few seconds even if very fit.
I agree. Swimming with rifle, LBE and ruck can be done because they trap air in them (especially the ruck) and act almost like a life jacket. Not fun, but you can do it.
Doing it with modern body armor (which soaks up water) unless it's the maritime model (which is sealed, and will not, water lessens the effect of kevlar apparently) would be a quick way to drown. A bunch of Marines drowned in a helo crash because they couldn't hold their breath and ditch their armor fast enough, which is why all modern body armor designs have QD capability.
Doing it in plate would be a very, very quick way to drown.
Doing it with modern body armor (which soaks up water) unless it's the maritime model (which is sealed, and will not, water lessens the effect of kevlar apparently) would be a quick way to drown. A bunch of Marines drowned in a helo crash because they couldn't hold their breath and ditch their armor fast enough, which is why all modern body armor designs have QD capability.
Doing it in plate would be a very, very quick way to drown.
Hallo.
I'm sorry to have to say this, but you are wrong regarding the weight of a Full Plate armour.
Am average Full plate armour could be as light as 20kg or 45 pounds, much lighter then the 65 pounds you described
Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plate_armour
This being the total weight one would have to notice what Tomm Skotner said: Actually, a full suit of plate armour weighs about 30-35 kg. The ordinary NATO soldier carries over 40 kg. of equipment on his body, and some even as much as 60 kg. So it is clearly more than possible to be fully functional with that kind of weight on your body. And I do not think plate armour hampered movement very much on account of its weight. And notice that these guys can jog, sprint, and fight all while wearing that amount of weight.
I'm not saying that there is solit proof of a knight swimming in full plate armour, as this probobly can never be proved of disproved..... unless your a mythbuster.
but your impression of the weight of a full plate armour is off the mark.
No hard feelings though.
Sjouke
I'm sorry to have to say this, but you are wrong regarding the weight of a Full Plate armour.
Am average Full plate armour could be as light as 20kg or 45 pounds, much lighter then the 65 pounds you described
Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plate_armour
This being the total weight one would have to notice what Tomm Skotner said: Actually, a full suit of plate armour weighs about 30-35 kg. The ordinary NATO soldier carries over 40 kg. of equipment on his body, and some even as much as 60 kg. So it is clearly more than possible to be fully functional with that kind of weight on your body. And I do not think plate armour hampered movement very much on account of its weight. And notice that these guys can jog, sprint, and fight all while wearing that amount of weight.
I'm not saying that there is solit proof of a knight swimming in full plate armour, as this probobly can never be proved of disproved..... unless your a mythbuster.
but your impression of the weight of a full plate armour is off the mark.
No hard feelings though.
Sjouke
| Ben Condon wrote: |
| Somewhat indirectly related, recent studies have shown that we probably reached close to our full athletic potential in the 1980's and that most the progress in the last 20-30 years has mostly just been with technology. This was based on the fact that since the 80's the amount of world records being broken is decreasing year by year and the margins they are being beaten by are getting progressively smaller. From the 1950's to the late 80's the opposite had been occurring. It seems that without new breakthroughs the amount of Olympic records being broken each time will drop to nearly 0 by about 2030. |
That's a great argument, but - to me - it tells of the emergence of doping to the professional sports, rather than better training methods. :(
Another factor affecting this is merely the fact that modern sportsmen devote a lot more of their time to specific kind of training, where as "the men of old" had more general training, hard work and other duties to perform.
| Sjouke de Jong wrote: |
| I'm sorry to have to say this, but you are wrong regarding the weight of a Full Plate armour.
Am average Full plate armour could be as light as 20kg or 45 pounds, much lighter then the 65 pounds you described |
Not really. Both figures are right, depending on the type and period of the armor. Medieval field harnesses were generally rather light, but later Renaissance armors were often a lot heavier despite having somewhat less coverage (three-quarters rather than full). The plates in later periods had to made stronger to resist at least lighter forms of gunfire and the most usual way to do this was simply to thicken the plate and add reinforcement pieces, both of which added considerably to the weight of a plate harness. Gordon Frye proved the difference the hard way as related in his blog post here:
http://historypundit.blogspot.com/2008/06/arm...edent.html
| Shahril Dzulkifli wrote: |
| What's more, they even wear heavy body armour which makes them quite difficult to run or get up after falling. |
Even if I fall to the ground during harnessfechten, I can still leap up and off the ground very fast. I have video laying around somewhere of a fight this summer where I get taken down around three times, of the three times, I did a roll out on one, and just jumped up out of the others. Armour, if fitted properly, is just an exoskeleton. I've run a half mile in my armour, and granted, I was slower, but the biggest disadvantage was lack of ventilation. In or out of armour, I bet an average warrior was faster than we think.
| Sjouke de Jong wrote: |
| Hallo.
I'm sorry to have to say this, but you are wrong regarding the weight of a Full Plate armour. Am average Full plate armour could be as light as 20kg or 45 pounds, much lighter then the 65 pounds you described |
Even ignoring the fact wikipedia is not a reliable source, you need to be a LOT more specific than this. Williams has a couple of pages listing the thicknesses of various breastplates and his figures vary from less than 2mm to 8mm. So the heaviest examples of plate are four times heavier than the lightest! Of course nobody would cover the entire body in 8mm thick plate, but making generalizations like you have done is counter productive.
Hi all
A little fun information in regards to one being able to move in armor, a couple of years ago in the H.C. Andersen Marathon one of the “runners” did the 42 km. in full armor. Granted, he only came in just under the 6 hours deadline, but he made it. He later told the paper that he’s largest problem was the heat and he had 2 friends running along and throw water on him to cool down.
Sorry for my bad English
Best
BL
A little fun information in regards to one being able to move in armor, a couple of years ago in the H.C. Andersen Marathon one of the “runners” did the 42 km. in full armor. Granted, he only came in just under the 6 hours deadline, but he made it. He later told the paper that he’s largest problem was the heat and he had 2 friends running along and throw water on him to cool down.
Sorry for my bad English
Best
BL
Page 3 of 3
You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
All contents © Copyright 2003-2006 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum