Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2007 3:02:12 GMT
please correct me if I'm wrong:
leather armor was the most basic type of armor, hardened enough it could stop/minimize or defeat arrows (non longbow type)
chain mail could deflect spears and non longbow arrows, but would have a tough time on axes and a heavy blow from a sword
plate armor was built to deflect sword blows (unless it could get into an armor joint), but axes, hammers and polearms could defeat it
scale and lamellar armor were largely Eastern styled armors that had roughly the same use as chain mail.
|
|
|
Post by rammstein on Dec 17, 2007 3:06:39 GMT
Leather was rather strong. And a padded jerkin could defeat a pretty hard sword cut....
Arma has a vid out on youtube where clements tries to cut maille with a sword. He fails at it pretty badly.
|
|
|
Post by kidcasanova on Dec 17, 2007 6:09:54 GMT
A sword could pierce plate armor, a la the "Shank" maneuver.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2007 7:08:35 GMT
akuzokuzan I think you have armor well categorized. This is the standard way of categorizing armor. I have learned to think of armor more in terms of which weapons and armor best match up. There was a lot of mixing of armor too.
A shieldman would want solid greevs for his lower legs and a head cap but would often have very light body armor or none at all. The swordarm would usually have some protection but nothing on the shield arm.
Cavalry often had heavy armor on their legs which were more vulnerable. I read that for a time it was common to have plate on your legs but mail for you upper body.
A pikeman would prefer a full suit of plate but they often mixed mail in too.
A sword may not pierce plate, but I see plate fail more then other armor in the SCA and we are not even using steel weapons. Those plates are attached to body via arming points and straps. When those break and armor literally falls off the body. Rivets also break. Joint articulation gets bent and locks into place. I once had to help a guy off the field because his leg armor was bent so bad he could not walk and was in great pain from the twisted mettle. His knee and greevs had gotten mangled together. I had to cut the straps to get his leg free from his own armor. Plate armor can be a death trap too. Plate armor can also cause joint dislocations. That is one of the reasons for no grappling in the SCA.
|
|
|
Post by kidcasanova on Dec 17, 2007 7:59:25 GMT
Tsafa, are you sure that a sword point would not pierce steel plate? I was always under the impression that the plate was strong against a shearing strike, but that the small point of impact of the blade tip was more than capable of piercing the armor.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2007 16:08:07 GMT
Not a sword point, because a man can't thrust with that amount of power. It all depends on the armor of course, but generally speaking, plate armor couldn't be penetrated by a long bow, which would posess more power on a finer point then a sword. Crossbows could penetrate plate, but it wasn't likely. The only thing I can think of that could penetrate an armored breastplate would be a couched lance held by a charging knight on a horse. And a warhammer spike. And a poleaxe. And an arquebus. Add fluting to the armor and most blows would just deflect off. BTW, when I say plate, I'm talking about a breastplate. Armor that is often overlooked includes the padded jack, and the Coat of Plates, or brigandine. The padded jack was a coat made of many (18-25) layers of thick, heavy linen or canvas. It could protect to a surprising degree. I remember reading on MyArmoury about a guy who did tests on one with a rondel dagger, while the jack was strapped to padding. www.myarmoury.com/chad_dagg_aa_rond.htmlHe said he was unable to penetrate the jack unless it was placed on the floor, and he jumped on it with all his weight on the dagger. Coats of Plates were basically a stepping point between mail and full plate. It was basically a bunch of small overlapping steel plates riveted or sewn into a leather or heavy linen coat. Offered great protection with less expense. www.forth-armoury.com/photo_gallery/COP/Coat_of_Plates.htm
|
|
|
Post by Brendan Olszowy on Dec 17, 2007 16:09:59 GMT
Ive punched through a 50 gallon drum with several swords. I don't know what guage that is though.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2007 18:16:04 GMT
Ive punched through a 50 gallon drum with several swords. I don't know what guage that is though. I'm going to caveat all this with the statement that these are my observations subject to correction by more experienced fighters in the SCA/ARMA/whatever as I'm still starting out on this .... Trash cans are generally 22 to 20 gauge galvanized steel. Most barrels are 20 to 18 gauge mild steel. I've seen some that were 16 gauge but those were special cases. Most plate armor is SCA legal at 16 gauge and live blade ready at 14 gauge. Some historical armors were as thick as 12 gauge. A good helmet is 14 gauge with 12 gauge pieces in places. Stainless steel seems to be the equal of taking 2 from the gauge number (SS 16 gauge is as strong as 14 gauge mild steel) A good chart showing gauge to mm metal thickness is here. Use the first and third columns for gauge to mm conversion. Imperial Gauge Imperial in mm Metric Sheet mm 10 3.25 3.0 12 2.64 2.5 14 2.03 2.0 16 1.63 1.5 18 1.22 1.2 20 0.91 0.9 22 0.71 0.7 24 0.56 0.6 26 0.46 0.5
|
Forgive the format, my BBCode skillz aren't that good. But it becomes clear that 16 guage is almost twice as thick as 20 gauge and 14 gauge is almost twice the thickness of 18 gauge. I've been doing a LOT of research on plate armor as I am getting ready to buy a set and there is a lot of costume armor out there at what looks like a decent price but the armor is unsafe and/or far too thin for anything approaching a real fight. And yes sword points can penetrate 16 gauge armor plate (that happens to be one of my personal tests on my sword collection for it to be considered a 'live blade'. It's harsh but it's my personal standard, so take it for what it's worth. [My Cheness, Darksword and BadgerBlade swords passed this test]). Something to consider though. Even if the blade did penetrate the armor plate there is still the gambezon that it would have to punch through. Hard spear points and and polearms and military picks are much more likely to get through that than any swrod point.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2007 18:55:18 GMT
Thanks for that Centurion! That's a great comparison for steel gauges. Karma.
However, I would like to point out that historical armour was usually not as thick as SCA armour. The reason being that the SCA build their stuff for lasting durability. They don't want to have to replace their helmet after every battle. Plus they have to be able to withstand a direct hit from what is basically a 3 pound club.
Historical helmets were usually within the 16 gauge range, with some even being as thin as 18 gauge. (Not on my head!)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2007 19:49:19 GMT
Historical helmets were usually within the 16 gauge range, with some even being as thin as 18 gauge. (Not on my head!) Source? A "thin" helmet could be supplemented by the usage of a chain mail head cover (hauberk) beneath the helmet.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2007 20:50:03 GMT
There was a rather heated thread about it on MyArmoury, but the site seems to be down at the moment. I'll find it later, but if you really want to know, go type helmet thickness into the myarmoury forum search.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2007 22:26:57 GMT
OK, thanks. Im just curious since im not especially knowledgeable about armor. Heated thread at myArmoury? Heaven forbid.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2007 22:28:54 GMT
Well, heated is a bad word. More like avid discussion.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 18, 2007 1:49:15 GMT
While I know chain mail, lamellar and scale armor are more or less equal on defensive terms, how each differ from the other, and how suited they are against weapons. Again as in modern body armor, armor was designed to minimize damage in battle not create invulnerable warriors, so I get the point that none was perfect.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 18, 2007 6:28:24 GMT
Tsafa, are you sure that a sword point would not pierce steel plate? I was always under the impression that the plate was strong against a shearing strike, but that the small point of impact of the blade tip was more than capable of piercing the armor. Sword points usually glance and deflect off solid plate. Late period breast plates and some helmets were often designed specifically to deflect powerful arrows by shaping them like the front of ship. Plate was vulnerable in the openings and joint articulations. There are cases of mail and padding stopping arrows, and presumably sword thrusts. We know this because of some period artwork that shows mailed men fighting with arrows sticking out of their front and back. I myself did some tests with butted mail over cardboard. The links broke and I was able to get about an inch of penetration. The surrounding links stopped further penetration. That is better then 3 or more inches of penetration and is probably survivable. Imagine how much more effective riveted mail is. Ive punched through a 50 gallon drum with several swords. I don't know what guage that is though. I'm going to caveat all this with the statement that these are my observations subject to correction by more experienced fighters in the SCA/ARMA/whatever as I'm still starting out on this .... Trash cans are generally 22 to 20 gauge galvanized steel. Most barrels are 20 to 18 gauge mild steel. I've seen some that were 16 gauge but those were special cases. Most plate armor is SCA legal at 16 gauge and live blade ready at 14 gauge. Some historical armors were as thick as 12 gauge. A good helmet is 14 gauge with 12 gauge pieces in places. Stainless steel seems to be the equal of taking 2 from the gauge number (SS 16 gauge is as strong as 14 gauge mild steel) A good chart showing gauge to mm metal thickness is here. Use the first and third columns for gauge to mm conversion. But it becomes clear that 16 guage is almost twice as thick as 20 gauge and 14 gauge is almost twice the thickness of 18 gauge. I've been doing a LOT of research on plate armor as I am getting ready to buy a set and there is a lot of costume armor out there at what looks like a decent price but the armor is unsafe and/or far too thin for anything approaching a real fight. And yes sword points can penetrate 16 gauge armor plate (that happens to be one of my personal tests on my sword collection for it to be considered a 'live blade'. It's harsh but it's my personal standard, so take it for what it's worth. [My Cheness, Darksword and BadgerBlade swords passed this test]). Thanks for that Centurion! That's a great comparison for steel gauges. Karma. However, I would like to point out that historical armor was usually not as thick as SCA armor. The reason being that the SCA build their stuff for lasting durability. They don't want to have to replace their helmet after every battle. Plus they have to be able to withstand a direct hit from what is basically a 3 pound club. Historical helmets were usually within the 16 gauge range, with some even being as thin as 18 gauge. (Not on my head!) SCA helmets are minimum 14 gage. Most are 12 ga on the side and 14 on the top. They weigh between 7 to 10 lbs. There are some historical great helms that are up to those standards and even heavier. Some jousting helms bolted down to the chest plate. Here is a link to an old post that talks about variations in historical helms. /index.cgi?board=armour&action=display&thread=1176550660 SCA helms are only similar to a minority of historical Great Helms in thickness. Those on the heavier end of the spectrum. If you are wearing a light Norman style helm you don't want to be hit on the head. You will see stars (as Darkintruder was saying). The rest of the armor for those people who wear plate in the SCA is 16 or 18 gage, as are my knees, elbows and gorget. This gage would have been a lot more common historically. Anything thicker and the armor starts to become too heavy. 16 and 18 gage is very hard to pierce. I have tried with nail and a hammer, forget it. It is also hard to pierce with cheap drill bits. You need cobolt or titanium bits. I guarantee you, that you can't get through with a sword thrust. Arrow... maybe. However.... 16 and especial 18 ga can be dented into immobility. My knees get dented all the time and I have to bend them back with tools. Funny thing is that they don't even get hit that often because knees are illegal target areas. They would be useless by now if people were actually aiming for them. In the SCA we use rattan swords that absorb and spread out the impact. My conclusion is that a sword edge swinging at 180 mph that concentrates all the power in on tiny spot can render an 18 gage knee or elbow immovable. Maybe not in one shot, but 10 should do it. There is a lot of luck and chance at play here. Rivets can also get knocked out and straps often break. The point of this is... that the conventional wisdom has been that sword strikes with the edge are ineffective against plate. I beg to differ. Sword strike at joint articulations and at light head armor can be very effective. Would this damage the sword edge? Maybe, but if you are still alive at the end of the day, there will be plenty of other swords laying around the battlefield that you take home instead.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 18, 2007 17:46:02 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 18, 2007 18:45:15 GMT
Awesome find. +1K Really shows how tough good maille can be.
|
|
|
Post by Jeff K. ( Jak) on Dec 18, 2007 18:56:35 GMT
those are some really interesting results. personally i dont like the looks of katanas and i dont own any but i really respect what they can do.this test shows how much better of a cutter the are than western long swords, although i think a really sharp spatulate point long sword could cut almost as well. maybe i should look into getting a katana as a backup weapon. +1 for that link.
|
|