| Author |
Message |
|
Kirk K.
|
 Posted: Thu 26 May, 2016 3:15 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Ant Mercer wrote: | Thought I'd also chime in, as I too like these utilitarian weapons. They're simple, no-nonsense, and do exactly what they say on the tin.
A few years ago I asked Tod to make me one:
Unfortunately I sold it on to a lovely gent on this forum, but I really enjoyed it whilst I had it! (forgive the camera-phone pictures)
Specs:
Weight: 2.4kg/ 4.25lbs
Shaft length: 111cm/ 43.5”
Spike length: 33cm/ 13 |
That is a truly lovely weapon! What is the approximate width and thickness of the spike at the base? Any particular reason for the length of the spike? I thought most were in the 8-10" range.
|
|
  |
 |
|
Philip Dyer
|
| Posted: Thu 26 May, 2016 3:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kirk K. wrote: | | Ant Mercer wrote: | Thought I'd also chime in, as I too like these utilitarian weapons. They're simple, no-nonsense, and do exactly what they say on the tin.
A few years ago I asked Tod to make me one:
Unfortunately I sold it on to a lovely gent on this forum, but I really enjoyed it whilst I had it! (forgive the camera-phone pictures)
Specs:
Weight: 2.4kg/ 4.25lbs
Shaft length: 111cm/ 43.5”
Spike length: 33cm/ 13 |
That is a truly lovely weapon! What is the approximate width and thickness of the spike at the base? Any particular reason for the length of the spike? I thought most were in the 8-10" range. |
The would suggest, based on arrowhead designs and rondel dagger designs, poleaxe spike tests, that it is designed for penetration of chainmail.
Last edited by Philip Dyer on Thu 26 May, 2016 3:46 pm; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kirk K.
|
| Posted: Thu 26 May, 2016 3:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gregg Sobocinski wrote: | | I believe these are way too short to be effective against a charge. How tall is a horse? The reason they were effective in the battle you reference is because the French heavy cavalry charged through marshy ground, which immobilized their horses, and also slowed the knights when they dismounted. These weapons were effective because fighters could subdue the knight with well aimed clubbing actions, and then stick the spike through mailed areas or gaps in the armor. They were never intentionally used to penetrate plate armor, even during a charge. |
You seem to be stating this as fact, yet I fail to see any historical material to tell us in detail exactly how the goedendag was used. If you have some, please post it. If not, then I would point out that your statement is an opinion.
---------- | Quote: | | Do we even know if these spikes were made with hardened steel? |
You know full well that we do not know, but we can speculate. The heavy ring would have likely been made by a blacksmith. I do not know if the spike was forged out of mild steel or hardened steel. I do not know if the Flemish military (it was a standard-issue weapon for them) had a weaponsmith turning out hardened spikes and blacksmiths making the caps and finishing the weapon (which is my guess). If we look to the context of the times, did relatively inexpensive weeapons have hardened blades/spikes/whatever? Spears are a relatively cheap weapon and they did, so why would they *not* harden the spike on a weapon with much more weight behind it, thus putting more stress on the spike? That does not make sense to me.
---------- | Quote: | | As with most battles, the success of this weapon was based on appropriate use of the weapons combined with effective strategy. There's no guaranteeing further success if subsequent battles had occurred. |
I do not understand this comment. The goedendag was an issue weapon in the Flemish military. The Flemish military moved onto other weapons after long service by the goedendag. The militias formed by Flemish burghers then used the weapon against French cavalry during the Flemish Civil War. You speak as if the goedendag appeared out of nowhere, was used in a single significant battle and then abandoned when in fact the weapon has a centuries-long history of use.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kirk K.
|
| Posted: Thu 26 May, 2016 3:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kirk K. wrote: | | Gregg Sobocinski wrote: | | I believe these are way too short to be effective against a charge. How tall is a horse? |
I assume you are talking about using the goedendag as a braced sharpened stake? If so, please elaborate on why you think it was "too short to be effective against a charge". That is not obvious to me.
---------- | Quote: | | The reason they were effective in the battle you reference is because the French heavy cavalry charged through marshy ground, which immobilized their horses, and also slowed the knights when they dismounted. These weapons were effective because fighters could subdue the knight with well aimed clubbing actions, and then stick the spike through mailed areas or gaps in the armor. They were never intentionally used to penetrate plate armor, even during a charge. |
You seem to be stating this as fact, yet I fail to see any historical material to tell us in detail exactly how the goedendag was used. If you have some, please post it. If not, then I would point out that your statement is an opinion.
---------- | Quote: | | Do we even know if these spikes were made with hardened steel? |
You know full well that we do not know, but we can speculate. The heavy ring would have likely been made by a blacksmith. I do not know if the spike was forged out of mild steel or hardened steel. I do not know if the Flemish military (it was a standard-issue weapon for them) had a weaponsmith turning out hardened spikes and blacksmiths making the caps and finishing the weapon (which is my guess). If we look to the context of the times, did relatively inexpensive weeapons have hardened blades/spikes/whatever? Spears are a relatively cheap weapon and they did, so why would they *not* harden the spike on a weapon with much more weight behind it, thus putting more stress on the spike? That does not make sense to me.
---------- | Quote: | | As with most battles, the success of this weapon was based on appropriate use of the weapons combined with effective strategy. There's no guaranteeing further success if subsequent battles had occurred. |
I do not understand this comment. The goedendag was an issue weapon in the Flemish military. The Flemish military moved onto other weapons after long service by the goedendag. The militias formed by Flemish burghers then used the weapon against French cavalry during the Flemish Civil War. You speak as if the goedendag appeared out of nowhere, was used in a single significant battle and then abandoned when in fact the weapon has a centuries-long history of use. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Philip Dyer
|
| Posted: Thu 26 May, 2016 6:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
But according to your Wikipedia article, it was at it's height of fame when plate armor wasn't that common and fell out of use when plate armor was more common.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kirk K.
|
| Posted: Thu 26 May, 2016 7:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Philip Dyer wrote: | | But according to your Wikipedia article, it was at it's height of fame when plate armor wasn't that common and fell out of use when plate armor was more common. |
What I got from the article is that the goedendag was used by the Flemish military right up to the point where better weapons became more cheaply available due to improvements in production technology. Since it was still available in numbers the retired goedendags were likely passed along to militia, a practice common in military orgs to this day. The militia found them to be effective and continued to use them, so far as I can tell, until the widespread availability of firearms changed everything. And why not? The spear remained effective. The club remained effective. The goedendag is essentially a useful hybrid of the two types, and simpler and cheaper to produce than most bladed pole weapons. The military moved on to more cutting edge weapons (horrible pun intended) and the militia stuck with a basic tool they could readily acquire that still worked just fine. After all, the Flemish militia was raised by the burghers who ran the craftsman guilds, so they had the necessary skilled labor to make something like a goedendag easily enough. Does that make sense to you?
Another question would be, if the militia abandoned the goedendag at some point before firearms became widespread, what did they replace it with? Some other inexpensive pole arm? They had various spears, axes, mauls and whatnot concurrently with the goedendag so those weapons apparently did not fill that niche. The burghers were businessmen and would want cheaper weapons. The cavalry threat did not disappear. I wish we had more historical sources because it would be fascinating to know just how Flemish militia anti-cavalry tactics and weapons changed from the 15th century onwards.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gregg Sobocinski
|
| Posted: Thu 26 May, 2016 8:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[size=12][size=12] | Kirk K. wrote: | | Kirk K. wrote: | | Gregg Sobocinski wrote: | | I believe these are way too short to be effective against a charge. How tall is a horse? |
I assume you are talking about using the goedendag as a braced sharpened stake? If so, please elaborate on why you think it was "too short to be effective against a charge". That is not obvious to me.
---------- | Quote: | | The reason they were effective in the battle you reference is because the French heavy cavalry charged through marshy ground, which immobilized their horses, and also slowed the knights when they dismounted. These weapons were effective because fighters could subdue the knight with well aimed clubbing actions, and then stick the spike through mailed areas or gaps in the armor. They were never intentionally used to penetrate plate armor, even during a charge. |
You seem to be stating this as fact, yet I fail to see any historical material to tell us in detail exactly how the goedendag was used. If you have some, please post it. If not, then I would point out that your statement is an opinion.
---------- | Quote: | | Do we even know if these spikes were made with hardened steel? |
You know full well that we do not know, but we can speculate. The heavy ring would have likely been made by a blacksmith. I do not know if the spike was forged out of mild steel or hardened steel. I do not know if the Flemish military (it was a standard-issue weapon for them) had a weaponsmith turning out hardened spikes and blacksmiths making the caps and finishing the weapon (which is my guess). If we look to the context of the times, did relatively inexpensive weeapons have hardened blades/spikes/whatever? Spears are a relatively cheap weapon and they did, so why would they *not* harden the spike on a weapon with much more weight behind it, thus putting more stress on the spike? That does not make sense to me.
---------- | Quote: | | As with most battles, the success of this weapon was based on appropriate use of the weapons combined with effective strategy. There's no guaranteeing further success if subsequent battles had occurred. |
I do not understand this comment. The goedendag was an issue weapon in the Flemish military. The Flemish military moved onto other weapons after long service by the goedendag. The militias formed by Flemish burghers then used the weapon against French cavalry during the Flemish Civil War. You speak as if the goedendag appeared out of nowhere, was used in a single significant battle and then abandoned when in fact the weapon has a centuries-long history of use. |
|
I apologize that I missed some of your later clarification regarding how I was interpreting some of your statements. My own statements were based on my memory of previous discussions about this battle and separate discussions regarding weapons penetration. I'll try to find time to link to those discussions. No disrespect was intended by my statements.
I will address a couple of your comments, though.
The use of the goedendag I describe is the same manner in which similar, under 5 foot long pole weapons were used against armored opponents. I can not quote any particular fight manual of the time period at this moment. I had not read the Wiki article before commenting, so I'm willing to withdraw this point.
Historical examples of the Flemmish goedendag do exist, although I don't know if they are from this particular battle. I haven't read anything about testing the metallurgy of these existing examples.
My last point is one that comes up often in discussions of past battles, although I could have stated it more elegantly. I meant to say that although I think the goedendag is an excellent weapon, used extremely well in the Battle of Courtrai, the poor strategy of the French command had just as much to do with its success as the use of the weapon itself. Weapons are still tools of battle, and are only as good as the technique you use with them. I'm sure the goedendag was used over a period of time, but this is the only historical account about which I'm aware where they were specifically mentioned in a battle account. If you are aware of other accounts, I'd be grateful for the references.
If you feel these comments are not adding to the discussion, you're welcome to move past them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kirk K.
|
| Posted: Fri 27 May, 2016 2:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gregg Sobocinski wrote: | [size=12][size=12] | Kirk K. wrote: | | Kirk K. wrote: | | Gregg Sobocinski wrote: | | I believe these are way too short to be effective against a charge. How tall is a horse? |
I assume you are talking about using the goedendag as a braced sharpened stake? If so, please elaborate on why you think it was "too short to be effective against a charge". That is not obvious to me.
---------- | Quote: | | The reason they were effective in the battle you reference is because the French heavy cavalry charged through marshy ground, which immobilized their horses, and also slowed the knights when they dismounted. These weapons were effective because fighters could subdue the knight with well aimed clubbing actions, and then stick the spike through mailed areas or gaps in the armor. They were never intentionally used to penetrate plate armor, even during a charge. |
You seem to be stating this as fact, yet I fail to see any historical material to tell us in detail exactly how the goedendag was used. If you have some, please post it. If not, then I would point out that your statement is an opinion.
---------- | Quote: | | Do we even know if these spikes were made with hardened steel? |
You know full well that we do not know, but we can speculate. The heavy ring would have likely been made by a blacksmith. I do not know if the spike was forged out of mild steel or hardened steel. I do not know if the Flemish military (it was a standard-issue weapon for them) had a weaponsmith turning out hardened spikes and blacksmiths making the caps and finishing the weapon (which is my guess). If we look to the context of the times, did relatively inexpensive weeapons have hardened blades/spikes/whatever? Spears are a relatively cheap weapon and they did, so why would they *not* harden the spike on a weapon with much more weight behind it, thus putting more stress on the spike? That does not make sense to me.
---------- | Quote: | | As with most battles, the success of this weapon was based on appropriate use of the weapons combined with effective strategy. There's no guaranteeing further success if subsequent battles had occurred. |
I do not understand this comment. The goedendag was an issue weapon in the Flemish military. The Flemish military moved onto other weapons after long service by the goedendag. The militias formed by Flemish burghers then used the weapon against French cavalry during the Flemish Civil War. You speak as if the goedendag appeared out of nowhere, was used in a single significant battle and then abandoned when in fact the weapon has a centuries-long history of use. |
|
I apologize that I missed some of your later clarification regarding how I was interpreting some of your statements. My own statements were based on my memory of previous discussions about this battle and separate discussions regarding weapons penetration. I'll try to find time to link to those discussions. No disrespect was intended by my statements.
I will address a couple of your comments, though.
The use of the goedendag I describe is the same manner in which similar, under 5 foot long pole weapons were used against armored opponents. I can not quote any particular fight manual of the time period at this moment. I had not read the Wiki article before commenting, so I'm willing to withdraw this point.
Historical examples of the Flemmish goedendag do exist, although I don't know if they are from this particular battle. I haven't read anything about testing the metallurgy of these existing examples.
My last point is one that comes up often in discussions of past battles, although I could have stated it more elegantly. I meant to say that although I think the goedendag is an excellent weapon, used extremely well in the Battle of Courtrai, the poor strategy of the French command had just as much to do with its success as the use of the weapon itself. Weapons are still tools of battle, and are only as good as the technique you use with them. I'm sure the goedendag was used over a period of time, but this is the only historical account about which I'm aware where they were specifically mentioned in a battle account. If you are aware of other accounts, I'd be grateful for the references.
If you feel these comments are not adding to the discussion, you're welcome to move past them. |
I am not offended in any way. You are making valuable contributions to the thread and challenging my ideas. That is exactly what I seek. How would I learn anything here otherwise? Your politeness is greatly appreciated, but do not hold back. I want to find as much of the truth of the matter as I can, so be as blunt as you need to be. I am.
|
|
|
|
|
Luka Borscak
|
| Posted: Fri 27 May, 2016 2:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Goedendag was first used in great numbers at the battle of Courtrai. As we already established, only plate armour at this time was coat of plates, and it is questionable how many man at arms had it and if you fought one who did, it would be smart to attack other body parts, not the torso which is protected by padding, mail and coat of plates. Most man at arms and knights would still wear full mail without plate reinforcements. So, goedendags weren't designed to combat plate. Could it pierce plate? Thinner pieces on limbs, probably, but limbs are difficult to thrust at because they are narrow targets and they move fast. Breastplates are extremely hard to pierce because of their cleverly designed shape made specifically to deflect hard thrusts. So while no one would say it's impossible that a certain goedendag could in some scenarios pierce some pieces of plate armour, it is obvious that it wasn't designed to do that and it couldn't do that reliably enough to count on it to change a result of a battle. Courtrai was a win for Flemings because of their superior defensive terrain and tactics. French, like they would often do in 100 years war, charged with little tactical consideration. In this particular case Flemings would win even if they had any other two handed impact weapons and not goedendags. And don't forget they to did have a certain number of man at arms equipped pretty much identical to french men at arms.
It's like Agincourt, or Crecy, Morgarten or Bannocburn or many other battles. People claim these battles were won with some miraculous ultimate weapon, be it longbow, halberds, pikes or goedendags. Actually, these battles were won with superior defensive positions and smart tactics which made good use of available terrain, troops and weapons. Bruce could win Bannocburn with crossbows and halberds, but he had pikes, Flemings could win Courtrai with halberds, pikes, two handed flails and crossbows, but they had goedendags, English could win Agincourt and Crecy with any of these, but they had longbows, stakes and men at arms, Swiss could also win Morgarten with any of these, but they had halberds and boulders. It's questionable if they even really had halberds at that point already. All of their opponents lost because they attacked or were attacked at a wrong time and wrong place with no tactics suitable for the time and place.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ant Mercer
|
| Posted: Fri 27 May, 2016 4:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
@Kirk: Thanks! It was very nice while I had it. Some other lucky bugger is enjoying now!
A lot of the measurements Tod used boiled down to how the piece 'felt'. I trusted Tod to estimate the appropriate length of the staff based on what dimensions we could find online (not an awful lot out there, at least not when we were making this). The length of the spike was also decided upon by the feel of the piece.
The spike was of square cross-section, tapering down to a needle-point. I think it was around 1" on a side at the base. Very sturdy!
Cheers,
Ant
|
|
 |
|
J. Nicolaysen
|
| Posted: Fri 27 May, 2016 5:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Might also look into the ahlspiess, a similar weapon of a different locale.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tim Mathews
Location: St Paul MN Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Posts: 172
|
| Posted: Fri 27 May, 2016 5:58 am Post subject: The Goedendag |
|
|
Hello all,
Seems to me that my friends at Arms and Armor made one of these a few years back. I believe that it is on the
Custom page ...
I remember handling it and being impressed with the weight of the thing ...Have to be a stud to handle that beast all day.
Tim Mathews
|
|
|
|
|
Pedro Paulo Gaião
|
| Posted: Fri 27 May, 2016 7:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gregg Sobocinski wrote: | | I believe these are way too short to be effective against a charge. How tall is a horse? The reason they were effective in the battle you reference is because the French heavy cavalry charged through marshy ground, which immobilized their horses, and also slowed the knights when they dismounted. These weapons were effective because fighters could subdue the knight with well aimed clubbing actions, and then stick the spike through mailed areas or gaps in the armor. They were never intentionally used to penetrate plate armor, even during a charge. |
I have my doubts whether the tip of this type of weapon could go against the armor of a knight of that time. In England you have references of armored surcoats from decades earlier than Courtrai (1302), as well as in Germany and in Scandinavia. If they have had this type of armor in England, they would certainly had in Flanders too. Armoured surcoats were invented in order to stop cavalry lances, so they would fare well against Goedendag's point.
But even if it was a set of mail+aketon, I still doubt that it could have such penetrating power to reach these protections.
I talked to a Belgian historian and he said that this type of weapon was most commonly used in city patrols and so, as they were easily made and didn't cost that much. It was not exactly the kind of weapon that a career warrior would choose to use
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mario M.
|
| Posted: Fri 27 May, 2016 11:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Kirk K.
no offense, but you are selling mist as we say here in the Balkans.
The notion of piercing weapons dealing with any kind of plate armor with ease is laughable.
Whatever you pierced was not a proper representation of hammered steel or even wrought iron;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XngmQyV0vuA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PcXd3upAF8A
Even a specialized thrusting corseque cannot go through 1.5mm steel;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Fu4LivPsOc
“The stream of Time, irresistible, ever moving, carries off and bears away all things that come to birth and plunges them into utter darkness...Nevertheless, the science of History is a great bulwark against this stream of Time; in a way it checks this irresistible flood, it holds in a tight grasp whatever it can seize floating on the surface and will not allow it to slip away into the depths of Oblivion." - Anna Comnena
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kirk K.
|
| Posted: Fri 27 May, 2016 4:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ant Mercer wrote: | @Kirk: Thanks! It was very nice while I had it. Some other lucky bugger is enjoying now!
A lot of the measurements Tod used boiled down to how the piece 'felt'. I trusted Tod to estimate the appropriate length of the staff based on what dimensions we could find online (not an awful lot out there, at least not when we were making this). The length of the spike was also decided upon by the feel of the piece.
The spike was of square cross-section, tapering down to a needle-point. I think it was around 1" on a side at the base. Very sturdy!
Cheers,
Ant |
Looking at the picture I had thought it was a dagger-style flat blade. A square spike that big must be impressive. I wish I could see and hold one, especially one that nice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kirk K.
|
| Posted: Fri 27 May, 2016 4:19 pm Post subject: Re: The Goedendag |
|
|
| Tim Mathews wrote: | Hello all,
Seems to me that my friends at Arms and Armor made one of these a few years back. I believe that it is on the
Custom page ...
I remember handling it and being impressed with the weight of the thing ...Have to be a stud to handle that beast all day. |
A link to that very A&A webpage and a pic of one of their goedendags is posted on the first page of this thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kirk K.
|
| Posted: Fri 27 May, 2016 4:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Luka Borscak wrote: | | Goedendag was first used in great numbers at the battle of Courtrai. |
Do we have detailed enough records of previous Flemish battles and weapon types used to make this statement with any certitude? Not saying you are wrong. I just want to understand if we have strong evidence that they were not used in battle in large number before Courtai, or instead a lack of evidence that they were.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kirk K.
|
| Posted: Fri 27 May, 2016 5:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mario M. wrote: | Kirk K.
no offense, but you are selling mist as we say here in the Balkans.
The notion of piercing weapons dealing with any kind of plate armor with ease is laughable. |
If I had said that you might have had a point there. In fact, I said penetration could be achieved in a certain narrow set of circumstances. Not quite the same thing, is it?
---------- | Quote: | | Whatever you pierced was not a proper representation of hammered steel or even wrought iron; |
First, "whatever you pierced"? I stated pretty clearly that it was pieces of 1/8" face-hardened plate. Second, not the exact same thing as a breastplate. Too obvious to need saying. Third, you seem to be implying that a 15th century French breastplate is stronger and more resistant to puncture than what I was using.
Putting aside the advances that have occurred in metallurgy and hardening techniques in the last eight centuries, you most strongly argue your point about hammer forging. I understand how hammer forging toughens metal. What you apparently do not realize is that modern manufacturers understand this full well. Sheet metal is hot-rolled repeatedly until it is thin enough. This process achieves not only the same changes in the density and crystalline structure that impact forging does, it actually does it better. The hot-rolled process allows perfect control of temperature, pressure, how fast it goes through the rollers; everything. It also offers something hand-forging could never offer; a perfectly consistent crystalline structure throughout the metal due to the utter consistency of the hot-rolling machine. Individual hammer blow simply cannot achieve that. This is why, if you took two billets of the same alloy, hot-rolled one and hand hammer-forged the other, the hot-rolled plate would be stronger, not weaker as you assumed. So which one of us is "selling mist" here?
---------- | Quote: | | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XngmQyV0vuA |
Thanks for the 'halberd versus breastplate' video. The halberd penetrated an armor segment, but did not go quite deep enough. The goedendag, with a couple more pounds of iron right behind the spike would have obviously gone deeper, and the halberd only had to go another inch or two to penetrate the padding completely. I did not expect to find actual real-world test data indicating that my hypothesis might actually be viable, but you just provided it for me. Thanks again!
BTW, the last video link you provided just throws errors for me.
---------- | Quote: | | Even a specialized thrusting corseque cannot go through 1.5mm steel; |
Remember that I said I was using 1/8" plate? I guess you did not bother to convert that to metric. 1/8" = 3.175mm, more than twice as thick.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Karl G
Location: Australia Joined: 25 Apr 2016
Posts: 66
|
| Posted: Sat 28 May, 2016 2:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gregg Sobocinski wrote: | I believe these are way too short to be effective against a charge. How tall is a horse? The reason they were effective in the battle you reference is because the French heavy cavalry charged through marshy ground, which immobilized their horses, and also slowed the knights when they dismounted. These weapons were effective because fighters could subdue the knight with well aimed clubbing actions, and then stick the spike through mailed areas or gaps in the armor. They were never intentionally used to penetrate plate armor, even during a charge.
Do we even know if these spikes were made with hardened steel?
As with most battles, the success of this weapon was based on appropriate use of the weapons combined with effective strategy. There's no guaranteeing further success if subsequent battles had occurred. |
I would also not like the idea of footbracing it to turn a horses charge given its length. I'd rather keep it to hand.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mario M.
|
| Posted: Sat 28 May, 2016 8:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kirk K. wrote: | | I stated pretty clearly that it was pieces of 1/8" face-hardened plate. |
...and you stating something is not proof.
| Kirk K. wrote: | | third, you seem to be implying that a 15th century French breastplate is stronger and more resistant to puncture than what I was using. |
Yes it absolutely is, otherwise you would not be able to penetrate it in the manner you stated.
| Kirk K. wrote: |
Putting aside the advances that have occurred in metallurgy and hardening techniques in the last eight centuries |
Read up on the works of Dr. Williams.
Medieval heat treated plate or even case hardened plate is actually stronger than modern industrial produced sheath steel.
The modern steel merely has less slag in it...that's pretty much it.
| Kirk K. wrote: | | What you apparently do not realize is that modern manufacturers understand this full well. Sheet metal is hot-rolled repeatedly until it is thin enough. This process achieves not only the same changes in the density and crystalline structure that impact forging does, it actually does it better. |
Prove it.
| Kirk K. wrote: | | So which one of us is "selling mist" here? |
You are.
| Kirk K. wrote: | | The goedendag, with a couple more pounds of iron right behind the spike would have obviously gone deeper |
...what?
Added weight to the tip/spike would not help the melee/thrust driven penetration.
The penetration is achieved by the energy delivered through muscle power.
Also, your notion of the goedendag having a couple more pounds of iron on the spike is ludicrous.
I handled a goedendag and most of them are 4 pounds in total.
The heaviest one I ever saw was 4.8 pounds.
| Kirk K. wrote: | | and the halberd only had to go another inch or two to penetrate the padding completely. |
Firstly, there was no quilted armor underneath that breastplate, just empty space, secondly, that "another inch or two" would require far more additional energy or penetrative power than you think.
| Kirk K. wrote: |
BTW, the last video link you provided just throws errors for me.
---------- | Quote: | | Even a specialized thrusting corseque cannot go through 1.5mm steel; |
Remember that I said I was using 1/8" plate? I guess you did not bother to convert that to metric. 1/8" = 3.175mm, more than twice as thick. |
I did bother to convert, that is why I stated that everything you are speaking is nothing but your own personal fantasies.
Some random dudes penetrating 3mm of steel with an improvised knife spearhead is dubious at best.
“The stream of Time, irresistible, ever moving, carries off and bears away all things that come to birth and plunges them into utter darkness...Nevertheless, the science of History is a great bulwark against this stream of Time; in a way it checks this irresistible flood, it holds in a tight grasp whatever it can seize floating on the surface and will not allow it to slip away into the depths of Oblivion." - Anna Comnena
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You 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 2003-2024 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum
|
This is a standard topic
