Erm, actual sources please. One aimed volley every 3 seconds defies belief, I'm afraid. The poor fellow who shouts the order to draw and loose strings; I can only imagine the agony he must go through. Especially since it is claimed that the individual archers also aimed at their targets. At 300 yards, no less. Moving targets on horseback too. You can't achieve those results with modern weapons, but you can with the English yeoman and his longbow, who is obviously the supreme example of the fighting soldier. Ever. And they were REAL MEN back then, not the weedy excuses for soldiers we get today.

I fail to see the difference between a military 'archer' and a military 'longbowman'. 24 arrows seems to have been the normal arrow supply, especially considering that they stuck them in the ground at their feet. Imagine sticking 72 arrows in the ground... the first hour of the battle must be spent arranging them nicely in a spiral pattern, I guess. Carrying them around must have been an even greater burden. Reloads from wagons in the rear would make sense, but only during infrequent pauses in the action.

I'm sorry, but those statistics really defy probability unless some further evidence can be produced. If the longbowmen were really that good, then I also want my Norman knights to breach huge stone walls on the charge, because that's what Anna said they could do, and she would know, having seen them in action.