It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Lonestar24
I am still curious what films you constantly refer to. I cannot name a single high-profile film that pits medieval armour against 30mm chain guns. I am led to believe you are speaking of B and C class exploitation films, which are not "Hollywood". Whatever.
In fact most films do show medieval armour to be a lot LESS tough than it actually is. In reality you could only penetrate many of these with a direct strike by a heavy pointed weapon like spears or swords. Even simple chain mail is sturdier than one might believe. I once handled a modern butchers chain glove. It was impressive, I bet I could have hit my arm with a heavy cleaver and not penetrate it. I would have broken my arm of course, but not penetrated
A knight in full quality plate rarely suffered penetration of his armour. Instead what incapacitated them more often than not was inner injuries by blunt strikes, blood loss, exhaustion and heat.
In films however soldiers and knights get routinely mowed down by long range arrows and simple slashes. You really get to wonder why these soldiers are shown to wear armour at all.
Originally posted by Lonestar24
I am still curious what films you constantly refer to. I cannot name a single high-profile film that pits medieval armour against 30mm chain guns. I am led to believe you are speaking of B and C class exploitation films, which are not "Hollywood". Whatever.
In fact most films do show medieval armour to be a lot LESS tough than it actually is. In reality you could only penetrate many of these with a direct strike by a heavy pointed weapon like spears or swords. Even simple chain mail is sturdier than one might believe. I once handled a modern butchers chain glove. It was impressive, I bet I could have hit my arm with a heavy cleaver and not penetrate it. I would have broken my arm of course, but not penetrated
A knight in full quality plate rarely suffered penetration of his armour. Instead what incapacitated them more often than not was inner injuries by blunt strikes, blood loss, exhaustion and heat.
In films however soldiers and knights get routinely mowed down by long range arrows and simple slashes. You really get to wonder why these soldiers are shown to wear armour at all.
Originally posted by Lonestar24
I am still curious what films you constantly refer to. I cannot name a single high-profile film that pits medieval armour against 30mm chain guns. I am led to believe you are speaking of B and C class exploitation films, which are not "Hollywood". Whatever.
Originally posted by DrJay1975
reply to post by masonicon
Watch Deadliest Warrior, knight vs Pirate. The lower powered blackpowder flintlocks wouldn't penetrate the armor. The higher powered blunderbus would.
If you get into modern firearms then penetrating a suit of armor is no big deal. A .223 will penetrate 1/4 in steel plate.
Originally posted by JDBlack
Iron Man uses special titanium, but that isn't important, and the move V for Vendetta doesn't have bulletproof armor, in fact the armor doesn't save him, though it would slow down the bullets that he is hit with (even so he shouldn't have been able to keep fighting). The 7.62 rounds can punch through 1/4th inch steel. That said, metal armor would probably stop or significantly slow lower calliber bullets.
Originally posted by miracleretiree
In real life their are rifles that will rip right throw any armor type like its nothing.
So,unless your in a military that has top secret armor. You wont find anything to make yourself invincible.
Originally posted by masonicon
Originally posted by miracleretiree
In real life their are rifles that will rip right throw any armor type like its nothing.
So,unless your in a military that has top secret armor. You wont find anything to make yourself invincible.
and What's that rifle?
Originally posted by aegis80
I lived in Paris, during that time I went to the musee les invalides, in there, there are plenty of breastplates and suits of armour, many of them riddled with small holes from bodkin arrows.
It's quite something to look at 1/2" steel and see that someone put a hole in it using a muscle powered projectile.
Although a modern rifle round isn't specifically designed to defeat such armour as the bodkin was, I'm betting total kinetic energy transferred to the target is quite a lot higher.
Would someone care to work that out? There were bows recovered form the mary rose which had draw weights in excess of 160lbs as I recall. How does that compare to a rifle round for total projectile energy?
Originally posted by Darce
. Lead projectiles don't penetrate steel very well as they are far less dense, they need a lot of energy and therefore velocity to do so.