The comment section on the m16 video was very active but it’s a politically divisive weapon cause it is similar to the AR-15. You run in a pro gun proliferation crowd which unfortunately has connections to far right extremism. Channels like Forgotten Weapons navigate those spaces well where they discuss the importance of access to arms but in US history the irony is the handful of times they were used in an organized matter was against the far right like John Brown.
One of the things I love about your videos is that it shows your taste in movies and shows. Guy Ritchie flicks and Trailer Park Boys? My man Johnny has good taste.
@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq How is a day never not made better by showing a clip of our beloved boys? They only get better with age. I'm just grateful we got ALL 12 seasons. Sure, some are better than others, but damn, I love them.
It sucks tpb is over... After it took Netflix by storm and they bought the rights and made more seasons some 10 years after the last one. I was so ready and excited for it. Now it's over for good RIP John Dunsworth...
Wanted to add 2 interesting points to this When it comes to removing arrows, those with barbed heads such as a 'swallows tail' head were specifically designed to hunt big game - with the barbs meaning the head lodged itself in the prey and would only work it's way deeper and do more damage as the animal tried to flee. They were of course also used for war - especially useful against cavalry, the obvious reasoning being the horse. I can't remember who, but one surgeon devised an ingenious way of removing them relatively harmlessly. All you needed was a pair of quills from really just about any bird. The hollow stems could be slid into the wound so as to cover a barb each, and then the quills and arrow pulled out simultaneously, the quills preventing the barbs from catching as you pull. On a more general note, lethality is something that those interested in military history often get wrong. Only in very modern times has lethality been at all important or sought after - and even then it is still not too highly rated. The problem, in the age of bows especially, is two-fold. First, armies need logistics, whether they're capable of fighting or not. Men must be fed, kept warm, and sheltered, and that all costs a huge amount of money. So to defeat an opponent, killing his troops may take them out of the battle yes, but it also takes them out of the war entirely and he no longer needs to cater to them either. If however, you only wound them, they may be unable to fight, but they still pose a drain on resources - a wounded man still needs food and water, warmth and shelter, and for some time medical care and medicine. Thus wounding a soldier is favorable to killing them. The second part of the problem lies in conquering. Standing armies were small and rare in the past, and most armies consisted mostly, if not entirely, of levied peasants. Let's say you are leader of a nation, and you decide to conquer another. Let's say you go to war and kill all your enemies, and conquer their land. Congratulations, you have just killed all the farmers and millers and masons and smiths and tanners etc that used to occupy that land. What use is land without people to live in it and work? You might as well have conquered a national park. So for this reason too it was preferable to wound, but not kill.
You contradict yourself. In modern times, wounding has become much more important than killing. Look at all the booby traps and anti personnel mines that have been made in the 20th Century. All designed to blow off a foot or a hand, not to kill.
At least we still got a lotta oldies in the Disney catalogue to search and rewatch... now, if only they'll unban certain eps from TaleSpin and Rescue Rangers...
Too few people have seen the classic 1938 Errol Flynn "The Adventure of Robin Hood". One of the best sword fights in all of film and an expert archer firing real arrows into extras (who were paid bonuses) that had wood blocks under their clothing.
Fun fact: Kevlar vests, sandbags and water are better at stopping bullets than arrows. Longbows and compound crossbows may penetrate a sandbag or vest and kill whoever is behind it! I think that it boils down to lower kinetic energy and higher momentum. Moreover, aerodynamics and fluid dynamics play a key role too. Arrows do look far more like harpoon arrows than bullets.
@@joule400 that's part of it, but also that bullets create too much drag in water and sand. They are also prone to shattering and they are very light, which reduces their ability to displace material.
Kevlar is made of fibers that get entangled arround the bullet, that spins very fast. This gets a lot of the energy from the bullet into all the vest and stops it. Arrows rotate way slower, have more mass and usually have cutting edges. This makea them get trough kevlar and sandbags like any other cloth. That is also why antibullet bests and antistab bests are different things
There's a lot of your body that can survive a puncture wound, including a shocking amount of your head and skull. Modern hunting broadheads are designed to slice a pretty significant path on their way through an animal, cutting blood vessels and damaging organs that the shaft might not hit. In a battlefield situation, you don't necessarily have to _kill people_ in order to remove them from the fight or to pin them down in a position where they can't do other things.
That second point is something a lot of fiction has forgotten about when it comes to arrows. They were designed to wound and maim first and foremost. Kinda hard to fight when you've got an arrow sticking through your calf and can barely walk.
@@planescaped And if you can't keep moving forward, the people behind you will have a harder time advancing. It disrupts the formation and makes the charge less impactful.
I disagree with your "can survive a puncture wound... shocking amount of your head and skull". Doctor Joseph Howland Bill 1862 described many abdominal arrow punctures, a nearly equal number of limbs getting struck by arrows, and the lowest number being head punctures. Men shot in the head with an arrow tended not to be visiting a surgeon, instead a pine box. In Bill's writing, only 5 of 80 arrow wounds were to the head. Of these five, three men sustained cranial punctures and all three died. I do agree that the psychological impact of getting skewered puts most men out of the fight. Once struck, movement is hindered until the arrow is removed, and the casualty in excruciating pain.
Or even just dirt, still has nasty bacteria in it and can cause an infection to take hold in mere hours. Considering some sieges lasted years, I would be willing to bet more than one person contracted tetanus or meningitis from everyday soil.
@@WhatIsSanity yeah, puncture wounds are extremelly dangerous, as they get no oxigen and are difficult to clean and dessinfect. Anaerobic bacteria thrive in this environment and cause gangrene. Thats why fangs are so nasty and you can easily die from a bite
I just love how you talked about arrow injuries while showing scenes from Robin Hood, one of my favorite films from my childhood and one of the best from the golden age of Disney animation.
I like the branching out into different subjects, I found this to be really fascinating. I’d always assumed arrows were more deadly than they actually are, and that’s good context to have when reading historical accounts.
"Hahaha, this is a shotgun Soul!" Nice Johnny . Another great video dude. Really enjoying you BOB reviews too. Please do more reviews. Your work is great man.
Fun fact: the shattered bones in proximity to blood vessels would be a major source of concern. If tiny fragments enter the bloodstream it could be game over. Plus, the risk of infections would be high.
@@edi9892 also fun fact: Taking an arrow to the knee doesn't mean he got shot in the knee with a bow and arrow. It is an old school colloquialism for getting married.
@@Astrosk1er like in some sort of domestic dispute. I can see that, got married to a crazy red-head and made the mistake of telling her to calm down in the middle of an argument.
I just finished watching Men int Tights, for about the 15th time. haha. So many great movies in this video. This video was really fascinating, I had no idea how arrows damaged and caused death, nor about bullet shockwaves. Really interesting, thanks.
@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq It's good....but it doesn't really get to the heights of Great. The stakes are absent, really. Even though it's a WWII adventure story.
Mel Brooks’ “Robin Hood: Men in Tights” was a very funny movie. - Speaking of arrows, if you have arrows like John Rambo has you needn’t worry about getting results. 😊
It should be noted that military arrows and javelins were often designed to be impossible to fire back. The trick is that the arrowhead doesn't break on impact but will fall off if you try to pull it out. This is where sockets and glue come in. Hunting and training arrows tend to be made cheaper, but can be reused to a limited extend (requires repairs, especially the finns). Hunting arrows are often also cutting on their way out, which means that the movement of the animal and the wobbling of the arrow makes things worse.
I remember reading that the Celts and Romans developed javelins, the gaesum and the pilum, and another one with a leaf-shaped head but a weakened core illustrated by concentric rings. These were designed to break or bend inside shields or pierce armour.
@@pyrrhusofepirus8491 Really not a bad idea on another video for JJ among others like VC booby traps such as punji traps or another sharp part caltrops as another idea and also for more modern weapons and things look into MIG jets of Korea and Vietnam as another, B-52 bombers and who knows there's also that Flying Telephone or S-75 missile as another idea, SA-7 and Stingers and many more since our times really have a lot out there.
Couple of points. Bow hunters have noticed that on occasion, animals hit by arrows hardly notice, particularly if the arrow passes right through. They gradually lose consciousness because of loss of blood, which apparently is more humane than being hit by a bullet. I don't know about that. Also, with a broadhead if you keep moving around the sharp edges will do more damage than if you keep still. And lastly, arrows don't transfer much energy if they go into the body perhaps but if they hit armour, the energy transferred could perhaps break ribs, depending on what you have underneath. It could easily be painful enough to make you hesitate in your attack.
@@kirotheavenger60 Depends on the range, the weight of the arrow, and the power of the bow. At a range of 20-40 feet, an arrow from a long bow hitting well-made armour can break the shaft. That's a not insignificant amount of energy.
@@kirotheavenger60 Depends on the bow, depends on the armour. At close range the longbow would penetrate some plate. It would certainly penetrate chainmail, there is a fair bit of disputation about this but - Plate maybe not so much, but mail... Quite likely.
That's a really good recommendation and interesting weapons I can tell you with some unique features. Among other for JJ like Attack copters such as the Apache and Soviet MI-24 Hind are also another thing to look into and maybe B-52 bomber is another among many others even those nuclear weapons we feared like the ICBM's of the later Cold War period I knew since I once lived through that time back in the 1980's. Anyway so much yet so little time.
@@stanleyronblake1646 That's a really good question and to find that out now well Google it and also can recommend that to JJ as well. Since knowing YT videos they can't be done alone and just suggesting it isn't always enough either.
@@stanleyronblake1646 Just saw a picture of the SA-2 from the Vietnam War or Flying Telephone pole as American pilots called it could that be it? Anyway have a look into it or as they say Google it.
@@stanleyronblake1646 Anyway may want to look this missile up nicknamed the Flying Telephone in the Vietnam War the Sa-2 Guideline. Could that be your missile in the movie?
Really is good and speaking of sharp stuff may look into Vietnam War era booby traps of the VC like the punji traps is one among many others even those nasty ball traps I know they used many variations may want to look into that. Also could go through tanks like the T-54/55 tanks and M1 Abrams along with those Technicals I mentioned earlier a whole long list that's for sure.
@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq Well really tough and these days I can tell you and things just aren't all what they appear anyways then again it's not like in times before 2020 either still had to get it out there.
Good topic and something I've thought about. A good archer as you said can do like 10 shots a minute. In ancient battles there could be thousands of archers firing thousands of arrows a minute. And rarely did it matter. The vast majority on ancient battles in the Mediterranean are settled by melee not range fire. Even mongol armies famous for their horse archers would end the battle with a charge to finnaly break an enamy. Arrows can be good at wearing an enamy down but they actually can be hard pressed to kill or even wound. One thing you should have talked about was, out side exceptions, it's easy to stop arrows. Big shields basic armor. Even padded cloth in medieval Europe all effectively stopped arrows. Arrows are not that deadly. And maybe even, not that good of a weapon.
I think one case of arrows making the difference was the egyptians shooting down an army of sea people in their boats. The sea people were stronger in melee, but didn't have any body armor. Or so the story goes.
I think that with Randy it is just assumed that it will be double cheese burgers while Ricky (who usually lives in a car) struggles to feed himself so has to make due with hamburger helper grilled on the car.
2:54 the arrows in this scene were fake digitally inserted. Because it was physically impossible for Orlando Bloom to shoot them as fast as Legolas was in the movie.
Probably also to avoid injuring stunt performers. Some trick shooters can replicate this speed of shooting, but using very light bows that wouldn't have the strength to injure.
There's also flechettes which have both bullet and arrow form. They are weaker metals, designed to deform after penetrating skin and causing more damage. If curare were a European plant, or if bows were still the primary weapon when the Spanish invaded South America, it would likely have been used, major effect from minor penetration.
On the other hand, arrow wounds don't produce the impact shock numbness of some bullet wounds, so the pain factor is greater, and can be incapacitating.
I have heard eight counts of people being hit by arrows. Two were my patients and the other six were from magazine articles. To a man, they felt a quack.Look down and it took them a while to figure out what had even happened, when hit by an arrow. They all reported a confusing lack of pain until they started moving or trying to get help.
I heard a Canadian used a longbow in the U.S.-Vietnam wirl, it was very specific use matching the theme of this video. How to safely capture an enemy from the frontline without unaliving them.
I watched, and I think of how Harold, King of England checked out, and I just realized: Why has there never been a major movie about Hastings??? The Brits are obsessed with it. (I checked on IMDB, and there was some stuff, but not what I would call major)
@@dragons123ism Maybe because Hollywood would have to notice? The Brits do good stuff, but it is always niche to them, it doesn't advertised/pushed out the way a big-budget Hollywood thing like say Kingdom of Heaven or various Robin Hood films did.
@@MM22966 Yes, that sounds right. However, it is not like it is only famous in the uk, and there have been scores of hollywood films set in the middle ages - Outlaw King, The King etc. In Hollywood's golden age we have the likes of Ivanhoe. Kingdom of Heaven deals with a far more niche subject than a Battle of Hastings movie .... There are also the TV series like Vikings and the Last Kingdom. I don't understand why there is nothing from either Hollywood or high production television about this famous battle .... 1066 and 1776 may be the most famous dates in the whole English speaking world
Even the ancients were aware of the limitations of arrows in lethality. This is general why the Romans favoured javelins, Slings & Scorpio's of the Fulminaria. Even the Greeks often favoured slingers over all archer but the Cretan archers. War bows on mass as the English used historically or horse back like the Parthians or Mongols is very effective but the latter mounted sort rely on hit & run tactics in the small war that must avoid pitched battle unlike the English that used bows to great success in pitched outnumbered battles. I'd far rather use a war dart a form of fletched javelin that's range is some 250feet with practice while a war bow is some 400 feet effectively & though arrows can reach 600-700feet in optimal condition they lose much of their punch due to their limited mass. An arrow is rarely over 2Ib's but usually closer to 1 Ib. Javelins & war darts are between 2-5Ib's. Later Roman armies did away with sling & the small but simple plumbata. People think of the Legions as gladius & scutum/sword & shield but the most common weapons they used was their pugio/dagger as well as the various ranged weapons they carried. What is great about sling is the munition is effectively infinite as pick up a stone or anything else solid yet small will do.
One fascinating (or perhaps sobering) realization is when people see how close one would have to be to really, effectively hit a target with a bow and arrow. Perhaps even more so the same can be said for hitting a specific point on a target and the arrow to deal damage. (Tods Workshop)
I also want to point out that arrow volleys were often held until the opponent was far closer than the maximum range, especially if the opponent was advancing on foot. The reason is simple - arrows lose such a large amount of penetrating and wounding power at long range that even very light and pierce-weak armour such as padded jack or gambeson had a decent chance to resist it, let alone shields and mail. Since archers didnt carry that many arrows, theyd often hold until the advance was within a hundred yards before loosing, to ensure their arrows were effectice.
Another point; most armies throughout history didn't have English/Welsh longbowmen or Mongolian archers who both had cultures that revolved around archery. Most armies and thus archers were not professionals, but people drafted from other professions, most commonly farming. Therefore having hundreds/thousands of people correctly judging the tragectory of their shots is highly unlikely, especially as differences in physique and imperfections in the handmade bows/arrows makes maximum ranges differ. By shooting well within maximum range, you ensure a far greater percentage of your volleys find targets rather than terrain. Not wasting arrows is especially important when they're handmade, dragged to battle by carts and you have to reserve arrows for the next battle in your campaign.
How deadly are arrows? When propelled by a bow a straight arrow with a one inch or larger broadhead is about 115 grains weight or larger and up to forty yards effective range it is very deadly and even beyond. Most bow shots on deer for example typically are taken up to forty yards. Beyond that and the shots are much harder to gauge but still can be taken if the archer is proficient enough. If an arrow does not kill in a vital area it certainly can wound.
The ending of the Kurosawa film *Throne of Blood* had lots of ACTUAL arrows shot "at" Toshiro Mifune (not really, more in front of him AND behind him). Supposedly, the arrows got close enough that Mifune didn't have to ACT terrified!
Jack Churchill. He also carried bagpipes and a broadsword. He was as sane as the next man. Unfortunately, the next man was Major-General Sir Percy Cleghorn Stanley Hobart.
TBF it also depends on the acceleration and deceleration times. If something gets accelerated to a speed over 0.5s but dissipates all its energy on the target over 0.1s, it'll have very different results on shooter Vs shot.
I read somewhere years ago, that Ben Franklin was a proponent of incorporating companies of archers into the continental army. No idea if it's true or not...
Yeah this one is actually in a letter and in the national archives unlike the Duke of Wellington bow claim which is false. Ben Franklin did suggest this early in the revolutionary war. Mainly because the colonists had to deal with a powder shortage. But Ben Franklin didn't suggest this again later when the Continental Army became a serious army.
I think dipping arrows in poison or something else was too much work, the main difference with crossbows is that you can have it ready all the time and some heavy crossbows had pretty big draw weight
They didnt specifically dip the arrow tips in poison but to have the high rate of volleys they stuck their arrows infront of them into the ground. Depending on sources and circumstances some factions used excrements on the arrow tips. In short as said in the video it wasnt necessarily the arrow that would kill you but the infection coming with it. Crossbows werent much different besides their draw weight, main difference was that the crossbow could be used by any crosseyed individual while using the bow required lifelong training especially in medieval Britain.
Crossbows bolts are typicaly bigger and heavier than arrows, so they would damage (slightly) larger area. As for poisons, well, yes, this sometimes happend even on open battlefields. There is at lest one account of english archers units in hundred years war suffreing from diarrhea and dipping their arrows in shit. Tho how much this increses the lethality, I'm not sure, after all, poison on tip would have to survive both travel and impact.
CROSSBOW bolts were heavier so would have more penetrative power. They would penetrative armor more effectively. One thing that occurred is that armored soldiers would die more from the blunt force trauma than from arrow penetration.
Probably crossbows are in another category with bolts capable of doing a lot more damage. Scientific American Magazine had a good article on the subject in Jan. 1985. The article can be purchased online. "The crossbow became popular in the 11th century. It was used in defensive situations for 500 years until the advent of efficient firearms."
The Mongols wore a silk shirt under their hide armour. If you were struck by an arrow the head would punch the shirt into the wound. You got a mate to twist the arrow, thereby wrapping the shirt around the arrow and then pulled them both out together, no extra tissue damage caused due to the silk shirt not tearing and protecting you from the arrow head upon extraction.
Ah, Disney's Robin Hood is quite a good enough film. However, I wish they kept that original ending where the titular hero got got by an arrow while doing a swimming escape. Interesting seeing Wizards here. Not perfect, but not a dull film either. 3:39: This. Am always annoyed when fictional characters haphazardly do that. Am wary of that trope ever since Steve Irwin's death by similar circumstances. 4:45: Would be quite a pain, since potential laser and plasma weapons are based on this. So much for kid friendly cartoons using them in lieu of ballistics. Wait, no Green Arrows and Hawkeyes?
Holy s*** Ricky Bobby getting hit with an arrow by Lahey I was not expecting that that should have a warning before you show something like that well thanks I have drink on the floor now I got to clean that up I guess thanks for the entertaining upload though and making me remember to watch the trailer park boys again.
Some ancient drawings from Japan show samurai fighting with many arrows stuck in their backs. I used to think it was something mythological but it makes sense.
Clothing can oddly be very tricky. Uniform people want to debate shades of green for hours on end or vent holes in a helmet. I've done a few items but could give it a try again.
Hey watch the 'how deadly are arrows video" it's the only one i've got Edit: man, being a surgeon in antiquity or medieval times would have been fking harrowing. And getting an arrow removed without much by way of anesthetic would be bad but maybe you would eventually pass out from screaming/shock. But the surgeon would have to keep focused during all that and be thinking several steps ahead about how to save someone
Initial thought before watching... arrows are MORE deadly than bullets bc of they are larger, cause additional damage when being removed, and have fat greater chances of infection.
I know most of my popular stuff is WW2-related, but I like mixing it up to keep it fun for myself and a few others.
You gotta keep it real, we get it.
The comment section on the m16 video was very active but it’s a politically divisive weapon cause it is similar to the AR-15. You run in a pro gun proliferation crowd which unfortunately has connections to far right extremism. Channels like Forgotten Weapons navigate those spaces well where they discuss the importance of access to arms but in US history the irony is the handful of times they were used in an organized matter was against the far right like John Brown.
Arrow bow
Shield and Sword during WW2
With the famous british soldier landing during dday with Sword and shield
I love this stuff!
Thank you for providing variety
I like how your specifically using the old cartoon Robin Hood
It's a brilliant cartoon. Arguably one of the best Robin Hood movies.
@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq No argument, it is the best. As much as I love the Errol Flynn movie, he was a swordsman, not an archer.
The second clip is Men in Tights...
@@RedTail1-1I’m sorry what?
Robin Hood and little John walkin through the forest laughin back and forth at what the other had to say
Jim Lahey, classically trained archer.
Thanks for including the boys in the video, Johnny. Nice to see Jim again.
Isn't it though? He really gave it his all. Fully committed.
Getting Randy his dirty old blue jay burger, cuz a man's gotta eat.
I quiver at the thought of any more arrow puns.
Point taken.
I think they've all hit
One of the things I love about your videos is that it shows your taste in movies and shows. Guy Ritchie flicks and Trailer Park Boys? My man Johnny has good taste.
Smokes, let's go.
thumbs up just for trailer park bouys
A man of fine taste
@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq How is a day never not made better by showing a clip of our beloved boys? They only get better with age. I'm just grateful we got ALL 12 seasons. Sure, some are better than others, but damn, I love them.
It sucks tpb is over... After it took Netflix by storm and they bought the rights and made more seasons some 10 years after the last one. I was so ready and excited for it. Now it's over for good RIP John Dunsworth...
Wanted to add 2 interesting points to this
When it comes to removing arrows, those with barbed heads such as a 'swallows tail' head were specifically designed to hunt big game - with the barbs meaning the head lodged itself in the prey and would only work it's way deeper and do more damage as the animal tried to flee. They were of course also used for war - especially useful against cavalry, the obvious reasoning being the horse. I can't remember who, but one surgeon devised an ingenious way of removing them relatively harmlessly. All you needed was a pair of quills from really just about any bird. The hollow stems could be slid into the wound so as to cover a barb each, and then the quills and arrow pulled out simultaneously, the quills preventing the barbs from catching as you pull.
On a more general note, lethality is something that those interested in military history often get wrong. Only in very modern times has lethality been at all important or sought after - and even then it is still not too highly rated. The problem, in the age of bows especially, is two-fold. First, armies need logistics, whether they're capable of fighting or not. Men must be fed, kept warm, and sheltered, and that all costs a huge amount of money. So to defeat an opponent, killing his troops may take them out of the battle yes, but it also takes them out of the war entirely and he no longer needs to cater to them either. If however, you only wound them, they may be unable to fight, but they still pose a drain on resources - a wounded man still needs food and water, warmth and shelter, and for some time medical care and medicine. Thus wounding a soldier is favorable to killing them.
The second part of the problem lies in conquering. Standing armies were small and rare in the past, and most armies consisted mostly, if not entirely, of levied peasants. Let's say you are leader of a nation, and you decide to conquer another. Let's say you go to war and kill all your enemies, and conquer their land. Congratulations, you have just killed all the farmers and millers and masons and smiths and tanners etc that used to occupy that land. What use is land without people to live in it and work? You might as well have conquered a national park. So for this reason too it was preferable to wound, but not kill.
You contradict yourself. In modern times, wounding has become much more important than killing.
Look at all the booby traps and anti personnel mines that have been made in the 20th Century.
All designed to blow off a foot or a hand, not to kill.
Five bonus cool points for unexpectedly including a clip from "Wizards"! Nicely done.
And Wizards wasn’t too bad a movie, either. I especially liked the twist with the trick Avatar’s mother taught him when Blackwolf wasn’t around…
Love the sillier and older clips in this video, nice change of pace too
I still wholeheartedly believe Disney's Robin Hood is ultimately the best of all the Robin Hood movies.
It's so sad to see how far Disney has fallen.
Disney of 2024 would make Robin and Little John gay, and have Maid Marian be the hero!
At least we still got a lotta oldies in the Disney catalogue to search and rewatch... now, if only they'll unban certain eps from TaleSpin and Rescue Rangers...
True, but empires rise and fall. Ask Sears & Roebuck, Woolworth, Roses, etc. Change is good and steamboat rodents are past their prime date.
@@harperhellems3648 I was always more of a Donald Duck fan myself
Too few people have seen the classic 1938 Errol Flynn "The Adventure of Robin Hood". One of the best sword fights in all of film and an expert archer firing real arrows into extras (who were paid bonuses) that had wood blocks under their clothing.
I was really expecting you to say at the end: "Aaaaalright, I'm Johnny. I hope you got the point."
Same here!
I bow to you, you are very punny.
Fun fact: Kevlar vests, sandbags and water are better at stopping bullets than arrows. Longbows and compound crossbows may penetrate a sandbag or vest and kill whoever is behind it!
I think that it boils down to lower kinetic energy and higher momentum. Moreover, aerodynamics and fluid dynamics play a key role too. Arrows do look far more like harpoon arrows than bullets.
basic explanation ive heard is that bullets cause damage like a hammer and arrows like a knife, crushing vs piercing
@@joule400 that's part of it, but also that bullets create too much drag in water and sand. They are also prone to shattering and they are very light, which reduces their ability to displace material.
Kevlar is made of fibers that get entangled arround the bullet, that spins very fast. This gets a lot of the energy from the bullet into all the vest and stops it. Arrows rotate way slower, have more mass and usually have cutting edges. This makea them get trough kevlar and sandbags like any other cloth. That is also why antibullet bests and antistab bests are different things
Reminds me of how hammers have a hard time breaking strong glass, but small porcelain pieces do shockingly better.
There's a lot of your body that can survive a puncture wound, including a shocking amount of your head and skull.
Modern hunting broadheads are designed to slice a pretty significant path on their way through an animal, cutting blood vessels and damaging organs that the shaft might not hit.
In a battlefield situation, you don't necessarily have to _kill people_ in order to remove them from the fight or to pin them down in a position where they can't do other things.
Yeah, painful injuries will really make you think twice and make it harder to move
That second point is something a lot of fiction has forgotten about when it comes to arrows. They were designed to wound and maim first and foremost.
Kinda hard to fight when you've got an arrow sticking through your calf and can barely walk.
@@planescaped And if you can't keep moving forward, the people behind you will have a harder time advancing. It disrupts the formation and makes the charge less impactful.
I've always heard from bow hunters they'd rather be hit by a bullet than a broadhead.
I disagree with your "can survive a puncture wound... shocking amount of your head and skull".
Doctor Joseph Howland Bill 1862 described many abdominal arrow punctures, a nearly equal number of limbs getting struck by arrows, and the lowest number being head punctures.
Men shot in the head with an arrow tended not to be visiting a surgeon, instead a pine box. In Bill's writing, only 5 of 80 arrow wounds were to the head. Of these five, three men sustained cranial punctures and all three died.
I do agree that the psychological impact of getting skewered puts most men out of the fight. Once struck, movement is hindered until the arrow is removed, and the casualty in excruciating pain.
Let’s not forget that some tribes around the world use arrow tips dipped in poison which can be deadly to take down a target.
Yeah, poisond or poo...
Frog venom. It's a peptide-based neurotoxin that works a lot like fentanyl.
@@jgrandson5651 Poo. Bad. very bad.
Or even just dirt, still has nasty bacteria in it and can cause an infection to take hold in mere hours. Considering some sieges lasted years, I would be willing to bet more than one person contracted tetanus or meningitis from everyday soil.
@@WhatIsSanity yeah, puncture wounds are extremelly dangerous, as they get no oxigen and are difficult to clean and dessinfect. Anaerobic bacteria thrive in this environment and cause gangrene. Thats why fangs are so nasty and you can easily die from a bite
2:23 I love that you used a clip of how Bullet Tooth Tony got his name for describing the effects of bullet wounds ❤
I just love how you talked about arrow injuries while showing scenes from Robin Hood, one of my favorite films from my childhood and one of the best from the golden age of Disney animation.
Informative and entertaining as always. Keep up the good work, king.
No matter the stuff you address, you have very good taste and master insights. Bring them on! Tank you man!
I like the branching out into different subjects, I found this to be really fascinating.
I’d always assumed arrows were more deadly than they actually are, and that’s good context to have when reading historical accounts.
Little john and Robin Hood running through the forest hopping fences dodging arrows and trying to get away 😄
"Hahaha, this is a shotgun Soul!"
Nice Johnny .
Another great video dude. Really enjoying you BOB reviews too. Please do more reviews.
Your work is great man.
"I used to be an adventurer like you. Then I took an arrow in the knee."
Fun fact: the shattered bones in proximity to blood vessels would be a major source of concern. If tiny fragments enter the bloodstream it could be game over. Plus, the risk of infections would be high.
@@edi9892 also fun fact: Taking an arrow to the knee doesn't mean he got shot in the knee with a bow and arrow. It is an old school colloquialism for getting married.
@@themightypen1530 what if he got married then took an arrow to the knee
@@Astrosk1er like in some sort of domestic dispute. I can see that, got married to a crazy red-head and made the mistake of telling her to calm down in the middle of an argument.
Garrus: I took a missile to the face.
I never said doubles Randy!
I feel like this whole video was made to fit the TPB clip in 😅
They’re personal burgers Baerb
Dirty burgers?
I love your videos man. You have such a unique variety of stuff that just tickles my history + military man brain a certain way
Love when you post this other type of content!
Great video once again, Johnny.
I just finished watching Men int Tights, for about the 15th time. haha. So many great movies in this video. This video was really fascinating, I had no idea how arrows damaged and caused death, nor about bullet shockwaves. Really interesting, thanks.
Now you're going to motivate Johnny to due a bullet-lethality episode, with the infamous "x-ray" sequence from 3 Kings.
@@MM22966 Haha, that would be a novel idea for a video. Even include some beef patties in the end.
Tod's workshop recently made some period realistic incendiary (chemical) arrows and they work very well.
HA! Trailer Park Boys?! Man, you find some good clips. I'm surprised at no Ungentlemanly Warfare ones, though. Demonetizing, maybe?
Haven't gotten around to it. Too many shit hawks in the park. Any good??
@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq It's good....but it doesn't really get to the heights of Great. The stakes are absent, really. Even though it's a WWII adventure story.
That does it, I'm going to re-watch robin hood prince of thieves.
Remember to watch the director's cut.
For anyone interested, look up Dr. Fackler's lectures on wound ballistics. Dude wrote the book on it.
Mel Brooks’ “Robin Hood: Men in Tights” was a very funny movie. - Speaking of arrows, if you have arrows like John Rambo has you needn’t worry about getting results. 😊
I never understood the logic of those Rambo arrows. At least they felt right in Hot Shots! Part Deux.
Maid Marian's (Amy Yasbeck) chastity belt was made for ultimate honeymoon -satisfaction-
frustration 🤣
Thank you very much for such an interesting video
Honorable mention: Rethel the Archer (Mischa Hausserman) doing some very tactical archery in 13th Warrior (ala Eaters of the Dead)
Lo, there do I see my father and my mother and all of my line stretching out before me.
It should be noted that military arrows and javelins were often designed to be impossible to fire back. The trick is that the arrowhead doesn't break on impact but will fall off if you try to pull it out. This is where sockets and glue come in.
Hunting and training arrows tend to be made cheaper, but can be reused to a limited extend (requires repairs, especially the finns).
Hunting arrows are often also cutting on their way out, which means that the movement of the animal and the wobbling of the arrow makes things worse.
That really is something to note about never got it in my mind about that.
I remember reading that the Celts and Romans developed javelins, the gaesum and the pilum, and another one with a leaf-shaped head but a weakened core illustrated by concentric rings. These were designed to break or bend inside shields or pierce armour.
@@pyrrhusofepirus8491 Really not a bad idea on another video for JJ among others like VC booby traps such as punji traps or another sharp part caltrops as another idea and also for more modern weapons and things look into MIG jets of Korea and Vietnam as another, B-52 bombers and who knows there's also that Flying Telephone or S-75 missile as another idea, SA-7 and Stingers and many more since our times really have a lot out there.
I was hoping to see that TNG clip in here, that shit was golden😂
Aaaallright, He's Johnny!
Thanks for including the names of all the scenes in the top corner!
If an arrow hits you in the heart, or in the brain, you are NOT going to be playing the violin any time soon!
Couple of points. Bow hunters have noticed that on occasion, animals hit by arrows hardly notice, particularly if the arrow passes right through. They gradually lose consciousness because of loss of blood, which apparently is more humane than being hit by a bullet. I don't know about that. Also, with a broadhead if you keep moving around the sharp edges will do more damage than if you keep still. And lastly, arrows don't transfer much energy if they go into the body perhaps but if they hit armour, the energy transferred could perhaps break ribs, depending on what you have underneath. It could easily be painful enough to make you hesitate in your attack.
Arrows don't carry much momentum, they'd struggle to break a rib, and wouldn't stand a chance at doing so through armour
@@kirotheavenger60 Depends on the range, the weight of the arrow, and the power of the bow. At a range of 20-40 feet, an arrow from a long bow hitting well-made armour can break the shaft. That's a not insignificant amount of energy.
@@kirotheavenger60
Depends on the bow, depends on the armour. At close range the longbow would penetrate some plate. It would certainly penetrate chainmail, there is a fair bit of disputation about this but - Plate maybe not so much, but mail... Quite likely.
@bobmetcalfe9640 penetrating armour is very different to breaking ribs without penetrating the armour
Long time bow hunter here.
Arrows have zero problem breaking ribs and even large bones like the humorous or the scapula of a deer or elk.
Hilarious how Trailer Park Boys showed one of the more accurate depictions of getting hit by an arrow
You get a like just for trailer park boys
Decent!
For the next a video about the Lebel M1886 or the MAT-49
That's a really good recommendation and interesting weapons I can tell you with some unique features. Among other for JJ like Attack copters such as the Apache and Soviet MI-24 Hind are also another thing to look into and maybe B-52 bomber is another among many others even those nuclear weapons we feared like the ICBM's of the later Cold War period I knew since I once lived through that time back in the 1980's. Anyway so much yet so little time.
@@kellychuang8373 you know witch Sam missile model appears in Behind Enemy Lines? That shotgun second charge was hallucinating for me
@@stanleyronblake1646 That's a really good question and to find that out now well Google it and also can recommend that to JJ as well. Since knowing YT videos they can't be done alone and just suggesting it isn't always enough either.
@@stanleyronblake1646 Just saw a picture of the SA-2 from the Vietnam War or Flying Telephone pole as American pilots called it could that be it? Anyway have a look into it or as they say Google it.
@@stanleyronblake1646 Anyway may want to look this missile up nicknamed the Flying Telephone in the Vietnam War the Sa-2 Guideline. Could that be your missile in the movie?
Really is good and speaking of sharp stuff may look into Vietnam War era booby traps of the VC like the punji traps is one among many others even those nasty ball traps I know they used many variations may want to look into that. Also could go through tanks like the T-54/55 tanks and M1 Abrams along with those Technicals I mentioned earlier a whole long list that's for sure.
You are keeping me busy with all your recommendations my man!
@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq Well really tough and these days I can tell you and things just aren't all what they appear anyways then again it's not like in times before 2020 either still had to get it out there.
@@JohnnyJohnsonEsq Anyway thanks and also another sharp thing to look out for Caltrops can be another good idea too.
thank you so much for including trailer park boys.
Trailer park boys clip is likely one of the most realistic:)
I was hoping you mention the difference between a composite bow and a crossbow, maybe next video
Loved that cartoon
Did they use to tie things/due their arrows so they could see who they hit after?
Loved that TPB clip.
Thank you JJ....Shoe🇺🇸
Wow it's been a long time since I've seen the movie Deliverance. Such a suspenseful classic.
Good topic and something I've thought about.
A good archer as you said can do like 10 shots a minute.
In ancient battles there could be thousands of archers firing thousands of arrows a minute. And rarely did it matter.
The vast majority on ancient battles in the Mediterranean are settled by melee not range fire. Even mongol armies famous for their horse archers would end the battle with a charge to finnaly break an enamy.
Arrows can be good at wearing an enamy down but they actually can be hard pressed to kill or even wound. One thing you should have talked about was, out side exceptions, it's easy to stop arrows. Big shields basic armor. Even padded cloth in medieval Europe all effectively stopped arrows.
Arrows are not that deadly. And maybe even, not that good of a weapon.
I think one case of arrows making the difference was the egyptians shooting down an army of sea people in their boats. The sea people were stronger in melee, but didn't have any body armor. Or so the story goes.
I want a video on the Springfield, 1903
Best part is TPB referenced as smokes let’s go 😂
I think that with Randy it is just assumed that it will be double cheese burgers while Ricky (who usually lives in a car) struggles to feed himself so has to make due with hamburger helper grilled on the car.
I like the break from ww2/1 topics. There are tons of interesting topics that would be entertaining to hear these shorts on.
I only know that arrows are rather pointy!
Good point.
They are rather more razerblade sharp.
2:54 the arrows in this scene were fake digitally inserted. Because it was physically impossible for Orlando Bloom to shoot them as fast as Legolas was in the movie.
Probably also to avoid injuring stunt performers. Some trick shooters can replicate this speed of shooting, but using very light bows that wouldn't have the strength to injure.
There's also flechettes which have both bullet and arrow form. They are weaker metals, designed to deform after penetrating skin and causing more damage. If curare were a European plant, or if bows were still the primary weapon when the Spanish invaded South America, it would likely have been used, major effect from minor penetration.
On the other hand, arrow wounds don't produce the impact shock numbness of some bullet wounds, so the pain factor is greater, and can be incapacitating.
I have heard eight counts of people being hit by arrows.
Two were my patients and the other six were from magazine articles.
To a man, they felt a quack.Look down and it took them a while to figure out what had even happened, when hit by an arrow.
They all reported a confusing lack of pain until they started moving or trying to get help.
the inclusion of the clip from Wizards was not something i was expecting to see. nice!
I heard a Canadian used a longbow in the U.S.-Vietnam wirl, it was very specific use matching the theme of this video. How to safely capture an enemy from the frontline without unaliving them.
Thanks for the bear necessities on the bow jokes. Take care, Johnny. Catch ya for another one.
Epic vid thx
I watched, and I think of how Harold, King of England checked out, and I just realized: Why has there never been a major movie about Hastings??? The Brits are obsessed with it. (I checked on IMDB, and there was some stuff, but not what I would call major)
I’ve wondered this most of my life honestly
@@dragons123ism Maybe because Hollywood would have to notice? The Brits do good stuff, but it is always niche to them, it doesn't advertised/pushed out the way a big-budget Hollywood thing like say Kingdom of Heaven or various Robin Hood films did.
@@MM22966 Yes, that sounds right. However, it is not like it is only famous in the uk, and there have been scores of hollywood films set in the middle ages - Outlaw King, The King etc. In Hollywood's golden age we have the likes of Ivanhoe. Kingdom of Heaven deals with a far more niche subject than a Battle of Hastings movie .... There are also the TV series like Vikings and the Last Kingdom. I don't understand why there is nothing from either Hollywood or high production television about this famous battle .... 1066 and 1776 may be the most famous dates in the whole English speaking world
@@dragons123ism True. (Though I have heard said that the Revolutionary War gets only lightly covered on the other side of the pond, lol!)
Telly Savalas in "Escape to Athena" Also took out some Germans with his crossbow, Rambo style.
Telly was a monk from Greece in this one, right?!
@@rolfagten857 Yes, he was.
Even the ancients were aware of the limitations of arrows in lethality.
This is general why the Romans favoured javelins, Slings & Scorpio's of the Fulminaria. Even the Greeks often favoured slingers over all archer but the Cretan archers.
War bows on mass as the English used historically or horse back like the Parthians or Mongols is very effective but the latter mounted sort rely on hit & run tactics in the small war that must avoid pitched battle unlike the English that used bows to great success in pitched outnumbered battles.
I'd far rather use a war dart a form of fletched javelin that's range is some 250feet with practice while a war bow is some 400 feet effectively & though arrows can reach 600-700feet in optimal condition they lose much of their punch due to their limited mass.
An arrow is rarely over 2Ib's but usually closer to 1 Ib.
Javelins & war darts are between 2-5Ib's.
Later Roman armies did away with sling & the small but simple plumbata.
People think of the Legions as gladius & scutum/sword & shield but the most common weapons they used was their pugio/dagger as well as the various ranged weapons they carried.
What is great about sling is the munition is effectively infinite as pick up a stone or anything else solid yet small will do.
One fascinating (or perhaps sobering) realization is when people see how close one would have to be to really, effectively hit a target with a bow and arrow. Perhaps even more so the same can be said for hitting a specific point on a target and the arrow to deal damage. (Tods Workshop)
I also want to point out that arrow volleys were often held until the opponent was far closer than the maximum range, especially if the opponent was advancing on foot.
The reason is simple - arrows lose such a large amount of penetrating and wounding power at long range that even very light and pierce-weak armour such as padded jack or gambeson had a decent chance to resist it, let alone shields and mail. Since archers didnt carry that many arrows, theyd often hold until the advance was within a hundred yards before loosing, to ensure their arrows were effectice.
Another point; most armies throughout history didn't have English/Welsh longbowmen or Mongolian archers who both had cultures that revolved around archery. Most armies and thus archers were not professionals, but people drafted from other professions, most commonly farming.
Therefore having hundreds/thousands of people correctly judging the tragectory of their shots is highly unlikely, especially as differences in physique and imperfections in the handmade bows/arrows makes maximum ranges differ. By shooting well within maximum range, you ensure a far greater percentage of your volleys find targets rather than terrain.
Not wasting arrows is especially important when they're handmade, dragged to battle by carts and you have to reserve arrows for the next battle in your campaign.
Music: ABC performing Poison Arrow from 1982.
How deadly are arrows?
When propelled by a bow a straight arrow with a one inch or larger broadhead is about 115 grains weight or larger and up to forty yards effective range it is very deadly and even beyond. Most bow shots on deer for example typically are taken up to forty yards. Beyond that and the shots are much harder to gauge but still can be taken if the archer is proficient enough. If an arrow does not kill in a vital area it certainly can wound.
Smokes, let’s go! 😂
The ending of the Kurosawa film *Throne of Blood* had lots of ACTUAL arrows shot "at" Toshiro Mifune (not really, more in front of him AND behind him). Supposedly, the arrows got close enough that Mifune didn't have to ACT terrified!
Wasn’t there a British soldier who carried a bow and arrow in world war 2? Legend!
Jack Churchill. He also carried bagpipes and a broadsword.
He was as sane as the next man. Unfortunately, the next man was Major-General Sir Percy Cleghorn Stanley Hobart.
And a broadsword.
Yes, "Mad Jack" Churchill. He also carried a set of bagpipes (which he would play), and a Scottish broadsword into battle.
The craziest soldier of the war except for that bear in some Polish artillery unit.
Was actually a longsword to be specific, and he shot two people with his longbow when landing in Norway(?) to conduct commando raids.
Good video, you came straight to the.
hahaha 😂😂😂 that greasy ending tho!!!!
DECENT!
if an arrow had enough energy to knock back the person it hit it would have an even greater effect on the person who lossed it - equall and opposite
TBF it also depends on the acceleration and deceleration times. If something gets accelerated to a speed over 0.5s but dissipates all its energy on the target over 0.1s, it'll have very different results on shooter Vs shot.
I was going to say Johnny strung this one out. But..... He got to the point before i could. 😅😅
I read somewhere years ago, that Ben Franklin was a proponent of incorporating companies of archers into the continental army. No idea if it's true or not...
Sounds cheap on paper, I hope it's true!
Abe Lincoln's war elephants were almost a thing so I can believe it.
Yeah this one is actually in a letter and in the national archives unlike the Duke of Wellington bow claim which is false. Ben Franklin did suggest this early in the revolutionary war. Mainly because the colonists had to deal with a powder shortage. But Ben Franklin didn't suggest this again later when the Continental Army became a serious army.
It was true but it was just a proposal and was quickly shot down by the rest of the Continental Congress.
“I once fought for 2 days with an arrow through my testicle”
Ideas for some next time:
Were crossbows any different?
Did they tip arrow tips in poison or something nasty, was it effective?
I think dipping arrows in poison or something else was too much work, the main difference with crossbows is that you can have it ready all the time and some heavy crossbows had pretty big draw weight
They didnt specifically dip the arrow tips in poison but to have the high rate of volleys they stuck their arrows infront of them into the ground. Depending on sources and circumstances some factions used excrements on the arrow tips. In short as said in the video it wasnt necessarily the arrow that would kill you but the infection coming with it.
Crossbows werent much different besides their draw weight, main difference was that the crossbow could be used by any crosseyed individual while using the bow required lifelong training especially in medieval Britain.
Crossbows bolts are typicaly bigger and heavier than arrows, so they would damage (slightly) larger area.
As for poisons, well, yes, this sometimes happend even on open battlefields. There is at lest one account of english archers units in hundred years war suffreing from diarrhea and dipping their arrows in shit. Tho how much this increses the lethality, I'm not sure, after all, poison on tip would have to survive both travel and impact.
Thanks for answers everyone
CROSSBOW bolts were heavier so would have more penetrative power. They would penetrative armor more effectively. One thing that occurred is that armored soldiers would die more from the blunt force trauma than from arrow penetration.
was surprised to not see any Kurosawa in here, particularly a scene in Throne of Blood
Probably crossbows are in another category with bolts capable of doing a lot more damage. Scientific American Magazine had a good article on the subject in Jan. 1985. The article can be purchased online. "The crossbow became popular in the 11th century. It was used in defensive situations for 500 years until the advent of efficient firearms."
Arrow wins in momentum, while Bullet wins in joule.
The Mongols wore a silk shirt under their hide armour. If you were struck by an arrow the head would punch the shirt into the wound. You got a mate to twist the arrow, thereby wrapping the shirt around the arrow and then pulled them both out together, no extra tissue damage caused due to the silk shirt not tearing and protecting you from the arrow head upon extraction.
Ah, Disney's Robin Hood is quite a good enough film. However, I wish they kept that original ending where the titular hero got got by an arrow while doing a swimming escape.
Interesting seeing Wizards here. Not perfect, but not a dull film either.
3:39: This. Am always annoyed when fictional characters haphazardly do that. Am wary of that trope ever since Steve Irwin's death by similar circumstances.
4:45: Would be quite a pain, since potential laser and plasma weapons are based on this. So much for kid friendly cartoons using them in lieu of ballistics.
Wait, no Green Arrows and Hawkeyes?
Good information .😊
Rambo used exploding tips against his enemy's and normal against snakes and fish.
Holy s*** Ricky Bobby getting hit with an arrow by Lahey I was not expecting that that should have a warning before you show something like that well thanks I have drink on the floor now I got to clean that up I guess thanks for the entertaining upload though and making me remember to watch the trailer park boys again.
While you're getting another drinkypoo maybe get a Lil top up for Johnny would ya bud
i love your videos johnny
Some ancient drawings from Japan show samurai fighting with many arrows stuck in their backs. I used to think it was something mythological but it makes sense.
Good to see Ricky with his arrow.
Can you do a video on the G 3 please 🙏
Fun video.
Hi Johnny are you able to do a series on Clothing ? Thought that might be a nice change !
Clothing can oddly be very tricky. Uniform people want to debate shades of green for hours on end or vent holes in a helmet. I've done a few items but could give it a try again.
All was well known to me. And its high time movie makers realize arrows have no stopping power.
Here is every clip of Robin Hood 0:45 1:33
'Dances with Wolves' mule skinner... took a few to take him out.
But the Buffalo all dropped in their tracks with the first shot.
Hey watch the 'how deadly are arrows video" it's the only one i've got
Edit: man, being a surgeon in antiquity or medieval times would have been fking harrowing. And getting an arrow removed without much by way of anesthetic would be bad but maybe you would eventually pass out from screaming/shock.
But the surgeon would have to keep focused during all that and be thinking several steps ahead about how to save someone
I’ve heard blue jay burgers are just as good as store bought
Initial thought before watching... arrows are MORE deadly than bullets bc of they are larger, cause additional damage when being removed, and have fat greater chances of infection.
Well it's apparently wrong. Bullets do more internal damage due to their speed being so much greater and the body being 70% water
Well, there are also so many variables. There certainly would be cases where arrows are more deadly. Caliber of the gun, for example.