Effectiveness of armour

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kekailoa

Well, I would think that it doesn't matter the earth is curved. The arrows fall in such a minuscule percentage of the earths surface that there is no real curve. You would have to shoot miles to achieve an elliptic shot, while an arrow firing only two hundred yards would adhere to the flat(ish?) ground and fall in a parabolic arc.

I think. Someone shed light on this.

---

The variance in terrain is much more important than the curvature of the earth over this distance. It is such a miniscule amount of curvature over, say, 500 yards that it follows a parabolic arc.

Besides, parabolas are easier to calculate.

Ok, so it's very very close to parabolic. :2thumbsup:

http://www.myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=11131

^^^this thread has a lot of good info...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by desert

Ok, so it's very very close to parabolic. :2thumbsup:

---

If one were to look at the parabolic vs. elliptical debate with enough rigour to distinguish them with any degree of clarity, analytical dynamics (viz. fluid dynamics and soft body dynamics) [1] would quickly become far more significant factors in determining the trajectory.

Just figured I'd take the pedantry to its logical extreme and save us all the trouble :holmes:

As for the use of the Scorpion against armoured enemies: for lack of reference, I'm inclined to agree that anyone hit by a scorpion is in for some serious pain, no matter where it hit -- even one's shield or weapon. That's just my unverified suspicion though. Re-enactors (not that I know of any re-enactors who have been shot by Scorpions) might have more to say on this issue.

-Glee

==========================
[1] Some details here: aerodynamics and the archer's paradox