LongBows and Archers

**Lord Fluffy** · 02-09-2007, 23:27

I don't see the advantage of shooting 2 shots like that though. It will complicate matters as you have to change angle every shot. Another disadvantage is you waste ammo. As the shots that goes up high won't have that much of an impact when it hits.

Now, in order for both arrows to impact together you have to be very very fast. There's only certain angle combinations where this will work. If the enemy is too far away that means the 2 angles that will allow similar impact is too close together. If the angles are too close to each other the time it takes to shoot the 2 arrows will also be too close to each other. If the enemy is too close, another issue as the time between arrows are now too far apart. The arrows that are shot in the air at a high angle will now take forever to come down.

On the other hand, I have heard rumors of English longbowmen putting 2 arrows in the air at the same time. But this has always been perceived as 2 rapid shots done at the same angle, such that as one arrow is about to hit, another is loosed. There's another thread on here somewhere that talked about this in great length. It's something that is possible, but perhaps not that common. Just like Howard Hill can shoot aspirin tablets tossed in the air with a longbow, yet not everyone else can do it.

**KHPike** · 02-10-2007, 04:36

Historically, shooting high angle shots had its advantages. It has been used a few times to cause arrows to land on top of men, bypassing their shield protection. One famous example is the Battle of Hastings, when William of Normandy ordered his archers to fire high above the shield wall. I'm not sure whether in real life whether this causes inaccuracy or any disadvantages due to the strange flight angle of the arrows, since its loss of forward force caused by the bow when flying downwards may reduce its AP ability?

**pike master** · 02-10-2007, 05:44

generally soldiers would have a much smaller cross section from above plus they need only a rounded helmet and shoulder plates to deflect incoming projectiles. add that to a shield held aloft and you have a difficult target to take down except for random hits. i think the main reason for any arched fire was to hit the enemy as far as you could without being vulnerable to his missile fire.

given a choice when comparing ammo expenditure, penetration and accuracy im sure a longbowman would want to get a direct shot when he could. high arched fire probably caused more of morale drop then real damage but i could be wrong as i often times am but discussions are good.

i think the biggest factor about high arched fire that succeeded at hastings was because of harolds upward gander looking at the descending arrows when he should have had his down under the protection of his helmet and mail.

**sapi** · 02-10-2007, 06:11

My guess is that historically, high angle arrows were used mainly at the same time as flat ones - that way the enemy couldn't easily protect both their heads and their front and some were bound to get through.

**psychologicalshock** · 02-10-2007, 08:17

By the way the comment on how the arrow loses force when it is shot straight upward is false. An arrow shot vertically up will come down with about the same force it was shot up. The reason? The arrow first goes up overcoming gravity, assuming it was this means that it was gaining altitude, once it could no longer it began to slowly accelerate downwards at about the same speed that it was losing force before but instead now it is gaining so at point A (The shot) and point C (The landing) the arrow has the same amount of force where at point B (Where the loss of force is 0) is where the arrow stops for a moment before coming back down. Thus, given good angling, some experience and no difference in flight time between AC and BC, the striking force should be maximum.

**JCoyote** · 02-10-2007, 08:43

You're a little off psych. You forgot about terminal velocity, the point at which atmospheric resistance counters any further gravitational acceleration. Granted, with something like an arrow it's pretty high because of the aerodynamics, but still... your statement is hardly absolute. Bullets fired upward seldom land with all the energy they launched with. But still, usually more than enough to hurt someone. However, a bullet has a much higher ballistic coefficient than an arrow.

Anyway Sextus, the arrows they fired were NOT light, they were pretty heavy and could come down with plenty of force. Parabolic fire was quite common with longbows. It was part of what made longbow training take so long. It wasn't just being able to put an arrow in a bullseye 20 yards away, and having the muscle developed to use the thing. It was also learning how to take long arching shots and adjust for wind, etc. THAT takes a lot of practice, even for landing it in a troop column.

**Ars Moriendi** · 02-10-2007, 08:54

Terminal velocity limit, indeed :

Shot from an extremely powerful bow, the 60 gram arrow would be given an initial speed of almost 60 m s-1. Aimed high in the air, this arrow would have a maximum range of 240 m, and it would arrive with a speed of between 40 and 45 m s-1
Gareth Rees, Stortford Archery Club

That's 55% loss of kinetic energy.

**Lorenzo_H** · 02-11-2007, 22:51

Originally Posted by JCoyote

You're a little off psych. You forgot about terminal velocity, the point at which atmospheric resistance counters any further gravitational acceleration. Granted, with something like an arrow it's pretty high because of the aerodynamics, but still... your statement is hardly absolute. Bullets fired upward seldom land with all the energy they launched with. But still, usually more than enough to hurt someone. However, a bullet has a much higher ballistic coefficient than an arrow.

Anyway Sextus, the arrows they fired were NOT light, they were pretty heavy and could come down with plenty of force. Parabolic fire was quite common with longbows. It was part of what made longbow training take so long. It wasn't just being able to put an arrow in a bullseye 20 yards away, and having the muscle developed to use the thing. It was also learning how to take long arching shots and adjust for wind, etc. THAT takes a lot of practice, even for landing it in a troop column.

The main skill in longbowery is the ability to loose as many arrows in a minute. A good Longbowman was expected to fire about 20 arrows a minute. This is one area CA did not accuratly reproduce.