Connorchap Creations works with bullets too Start with a 22 short, slowly make your way from that to rifle rounds, then shotgun slugs, then 20mms, then an 88 just to tie it altogether
It makes me snicker to hear Lindy always default the opponent as being a Frenchman. I know there's an historical reason for it, but it amuses me none the less.
So at a very long range, you realy don't want to be hit by a longbow. Because a man Who could throw a bow that far would be a fearsome opponent. He truly is a Brit! haha
sometimes the tiniest moments of silly humor in these videos totally gets me. like when he pretended to throw the rock and you hear 'ow!' i just wasnt expecting it there and cracked up
I think it's because many people imagine them being a solid metal rod. Maybe associating it with it's name, which makes them think of bolts in modern context as pieces of construction hardware :)
I often find myself rewatching Lindybeige videos from a few years prior. I've already seen them and know the information. However, they are pleasant to watch and his jokes never lose their effect. Well done! Wishing I could "thumbs up" this again.
If anyone's interested, the equations for at projectile in a vaccum are (y(t)=½*g*(t^2)+v_0*sin(θ)*t+s_0y, x(t)=v_0*cos(θ)*t+s_0x), this is ignoring wind resistance, then drag can be calculated with this equation: F=½*C*A*ρ*(v^2) F=force y(t)=displacement in y-direction at t x(t)=displacement in x-direction at t t=time g=acceleration due to gravity v_0=initial velocity θ=angle between x-axis and point of fire s_0y=initial displacement in y-direction s_0x=initial displacement in x-direction C=drag coefficient (different for every shape) A=largest cross sectional area in direction of motion ρ=density of the fluid the object is moving through v=velocity
@@freshrockpapa-e7799 Ah, so you've never been to a Middle school on a third world country, perhaps this might help, I'm about to finish university (I'm from Mexico) and this is the first time I have ever seen that equation.
“Adjustable spanner” Huh, so “throw a spanner in the works” & “this throws a wrench in things” aren’t just figuratively the same they’re literally the same.
bossmanviking yes, because you said they aren’t the same but they’re literally the same phrase, just with a word translated from one version of English to another. Neither phrase is poetic, or if they are they’re equally poetic.
+Pavel Cherepansky I find the quickest way to explain it is KE=mv^2 with air resistance is proportional to v so the faster it's going, the faster it looses energy people's eyes tend to glaze over at fluid dynamics equations, but since only one variable is changing it's a simple direct relationship
'I called it an spanner...' Well how dare you use the words common to your native language. I demand you speak 'real' English like we have in America. This is a sarcastic post, please do not murder me natives of England.
With MODERN archery they have a measurement called "Spine Weight" which refers to the strength of the arrows shaft. The purpose of having the correct spine weight, in relation to the poundage of your bow, is to help the arrow fly true'er through the air. When you fire an arrow, the force of the string bends the arrow, as Lindy described, and indeed if the Spine weight is too light, the arrow could break, BUT that is not the primary function of a correctly weighted arrow (shaft). Because of the force on the back end of the arrow, the arrow bends, and it will continue to bend back and forth throughout it's flight, this effect lessens as the arrow fly's. BUT, if the spine weight is to low, or to high for that matter, the arrow will not have straighten out before it hits its target, resulting in the arrow not hitting its target straight on, but rather hitting its target on an angle. resulting in less penetration. if the arrow is correctly "weighted" for the bow, the arrow should hit its targed straight on, achieving maximum penetration. SO in conclusion, the thickness of medieval arrows, was not just to prevent snapping the arrows, but rather to ensure a clean, direct and straight, hit on the target.
Have you seen SmarterEveryDay's (Destin's) video about this? That's how I learned about the archer's paradox. He meets a guy who can shoot an aspirin tablet clean out of the air. It's awesome.
And all you idiots (except maybe gigaboost) still use miles. Hell, I think your miles are different, too. Now I just have to figure out how to turn that into a joke. And also, I don’t mean to offend anyone with my use of the word idiots. I swear like a sailor.
+Braydon rantall He mentioned shooting a longbow at the French, he's definitely English (I know him personally too, that helps, and I'm French, that doesn't!!!!). ;)
>Stone, Pebble Lindy we use those terms here in the states too. Granted, pebble just means "tiny rocks" and stone is used to refer to what something's made out of.
arrow thickness is for penetration not for withstanding the rather gentle force of a bowstring releasing. You can shoot a thin arrow at something easily but what does it do when it hits something hard, the shaft breaks off the head losing the majority of its energy. a thicker shaft is so when the arrow hits its target it doesn't break but instead transfers all its energy to the target.
+grazzitdvram But to launch heavy arrow to reasonable distances you need harder launch and this is where material resistance comes in. You cant really make millions of arrows from wood so people had to be creative.
+grazzitdvram Have you ever hit yourself in the arm with a bowstring? Apparently not, because otherwise you would know that it freaking hurts and that a bowstring isn't gentle. So they made the arrows thicker to be able to make the bows stronger, however thicker arrows certainly help to prevent them from breaking aswell. As a German I'd say they hit two flies with one flap, but I don't think that makes sence in English ^^
i think this would heavily rely on the scenario. in a siege on the defending side i suppose they just wouldn't shoot arrows then. but what about battles? i like this question.
Around 5:00 I think you are looking for the physics and engineering term called buckling, which is dependent upon a thing called slenderness ratio. Look it up, I think that will further clarify your explanation.
A rock is a stone, but a stone isn't a rock. This isn't just a British way of calling them, it's the proper definitions of the words. Rock means A *large* rugged mass of hard mineral material or stone. While a stone is just any sized mass of hard mineral material.
The point might've been about how big a stone a rock is for Americans. I'm an American, and we call almost any stone, including pebbles, on occasion, rocks.
I only have 1 visible scar, and it was because i used a lighter arrow on a heavier bow. Be careful with bows, they're not toys. Arrows breaking when firing can go in any direction; in my case, through my hand
+Ethan Porter Relevant only in that they're both ranged weapons, but it always amuses me imagining the look on the first boomerang-user's expression and the panic overtaking him as the implement came back in his general direction.
Uh, you talked exclusively about the missiles (arrows) and not at all about ballistics: the science of the motion of projectiles in flight or the flight characteristics of a projectile. I suppose you are going to say that the science of missiles themselves is also ballistics. That would be a secondary meaning. But really, we expected you to talk about missile trajectories!! Meh.
You've left out one or two important stress factors! As the archer draws the bow, his fingers impart some twist on the string which effectively pre-loads the back or notch end of the arrow, at full draw, such that it wants to untwist against the firmly fitting notch which for a righhanded archer is in a counter clockwise direction. This has the effect of applying a torque to the arrow which lies partly on the hand of the archer and resting against the left side of the bow stave. The force increases the bend force along the stave as does the fact that the arrow isn't being released straight but at an angle equal to the tangent(-1) of half the bow stave thickness to the length of draw. The arrow upon release with the twist imparted and the moment of force due to inertia wants to bend itself around the bow stave upon release before straightening in flight. This doesn't occur as much in some centre or "through shot " bows that release the arrow in a straight line and release aids are used here to prevent the string twisting under the fingers which otherwise could throw the arrow off centre. Now if the arrow is TOO stiff then it bends less around the bow and for a right handed shooter will deflect over to the left. If it is not stiff enough then it will not fully stabilise in flight but "wobble" and initially tend to the right or even snap with the stresses. Arrows do in fact have to be graded by stiffness for this reason by both the draw weight of the bow and by the length of draw...simple physics can be used but in medievel times archers, fletchers and bowyers all knew what grade of arrow was needed. The barrelling thickness and length may also have been determined by the type of arrowhead being fitted. The heavier the head the greater the initial inertial moment at release, the greater the force alplied and the thiccker and stiffer the arrow stave needed to be. These days we use Port Orford Cedar for wooden staves. Back then ash was used with harder timber sometimes spliced in nearer the tip to improve strength and lessen the chances of the stave breaking near the tip upon impact especially with armour. The thought and knowledge and skill of these medievel fletchers and makers of arrow blanks was fabulous. That's right, I used the word " Fabulous" because I'm English!
It could conceivably go on forever at the same speed unless it hit something, so yea I'd say it would be quite effective. But I don't know how low gravity would effect tension, could you even fire a bow in space?
yeah elastic forces would still work, if you were in earth orbit though i doubt the arrow would achieve escape velocity and most likely would eventually fall or stay in orbit as dangerous space garbage. i can just imagine a future satellite being impaled by a rogue arrow fired decades prior lol
+raglanheuser The main problem is launching - no atmosphere means no aerodynamic stabilisation, so the slightest bit of spin and you're as likely to hit with the middle of the arrow as with either end. In orbit, things are even worse - over time, tidal forces would tend to leave the arrow pointing straight up and down, so eventually anything it orbits into will be hit lengthways rather than point-first...
+Peter Welsh welshy46 Bahco made the most common design in use today for adjustable spanner, but there was also an English design and a French one, too.
Most underappreciated comic relief. Rewatching this video semi-regularly, and it just strikes me again and again how incredibly well rythmed and produced (yet simple) it is.
I like how many of Lindy's videos are so spontaneous; it's obvious here, when you see his surprise, not expecting the rock to move when he blew against it.
The proper term to use for the ping-pong ball vs. stone example (yes, I said 'proper' and 'stone'... because you're British) is density, which is mass/volume.
We got it you're British. I am an American. Although we may be two peoples, separated by a common language, Americans DO understand the English version of the English language.
Hey good sir! I have a very curious question that I hope you can answer me with a video hopefuly. Why in Medieval times (both early and middle period) infantry no longer used javelins like Roman Legionaries?
Taras Rud' Even in the ancient times there were lots of throw away infantry men (especially the in "barbarian" societyes and even in pre Marian Rome when Roman soldiers needed to buy their own equipment) who still had javelins both for throwing before charging into battle and for skirmishing purposes. When it comes to the nobility why didn't they at least had javelins? Ofcourse many of them preferred horse combat but for example in Dark Ages England (500-1066 AD) the nobility didn't had that much in terms of cavalry if I'm not mistaken. They surrounded themselves by housecarls type bodyguards who fought on foot. Why didn't they had javelins? And the question can also be put to the levy soldiers? Later in the middle period of the Medieval age (1000- 1300/1400) many kingdoms could field archers and training a man just the basics of the bow can take entire years since the bow is a difficult weapon. It would be much easier, faster and probably cheaper to equip the levy troops with javelins who are easy to learn how to throw and also do a lot of damage in close range (especially to poorly or semy armoured foes). Let's go back the Dark Ages. Considering that (even for the Christian Germanic and Celtic kingdoms) warfare didn't change that much from since thy were just war mongering barbarians in the 300's and 400's why didn't they kept the javelins? Again, they would be cheap, easy to handle and can do a lot of damage and can penetrate (if I'm not wrong) even the best armour available back then which was chain mail and/or iron scale armour. Now I know that the Irish Celts used a type of javelin which had great effect in the Dark Ages and also the Scots and Welsh warriors had javelins but they were only used by levy troops whose purpose was to skirmish with the enemy. Why didn't the melee levies also used javelins before charging into battle?
MrWubbles That would be the case if we were talking only about the 16th and 17th or maybe even 15th century when indeed Europe reached it's peak in creating armor. But if we talk the Dark Ages (400/500-1000 AD) then the best armour available was cahin mail and/or maybe supplemented by scale armour (things that if I'm not wrong can be penetrated by a heavy javelin similar to a Roman pilum which was especially designed for that). This type of armour was only available to the nobility and their retinues/bodyguards. If we talk about the the next period (1000-1400) then we talk about the appearance of eary plate armour which is powerful enough to stop a javelin however this kind of armour was still available only to the upper class (knights and nobility) while the levy peasant troops and men at arms had access only to gambisom/lether and chain mail if they were lucky. By all accontts if we take into consideration all of these facts then I think the question: why didn't medieval infantry men continued to use precursor javelins before charging into melee just like Roman legionaries is a quite legimate one. Mind you I'm not really big into military history myself but this why I put this question.
Radovan Kuburic But why? Why didn't they also used javelins? The ancestors of all these peoples used javelins in battle and also had interactions with the Romans who used javelins before charging into battle. Also, I have to reafirm that my question is rather "why didn't melee medieval infantry used javelins before charging into battle" and NOT "why javelins were not used in the Medieval period" (which obiviously wasn't the case).
Radovan Kuburic Fair enough. "Retinues of nobles" I would call Men-at-arms, but the urban militias and mercenary armies are definitely a good point. Why didn't those people use javelins? Well crossbows replaced javelins for many people. Also the infantry were not using big shields any more like Hoplites and Legionaries did but more often had polearms. Maybe it's less convenient to use a javelin with a polearm than when you are fighting with sword and shield.
Now please explain how ballistas were used. They don't make much sense to me. With a really big catapult throwing round projectiles you could knock down buildings or set it to make a line drive and bowl down over dozens of french men. But a ballista seems like it wouldn't do much devastation. If it hits a sturdy stone building it'll just create more business for masons. If you aim it straight into the front line of troops I could see it going through maybe 6 men before stopping and then the crew has to spend 10 minutes reloading it. Unless you are trying to kill large moving beasts I don't get it.
And what were gigantic Crossbows on Towers or maybe on wheels called? I'm pretty sure Catapults; Trebuchets, Onagers or Mangonels where the stone stuff flinging guys, and ballistae the giant arrow stuff flinging guys.
Giant crossbows are usually called Ballista. Wheeled towers are called belfries. Smaller ballista shooting large arrows/quarrels are scorpions or cheroballista, depending on type, or springbalds(I think) in medieval times. Alot of books are not consistant in the terms they use though.
A large problem with naming seige weapons is that they sound similar, but function differently while having a vaguelt similar shape. That and one type of engine might have 3 or four names. depending on where it was used. Some engines were Torsion powered while others were Flexion powered. Then you have Direct fire vs indirect fire. A Ballista is a tortion powered, stone throwing, direct fire engine that is 'crossbow shaped' while a Scorpion is a torsion powered, bolt-throwing, direct fire eninge of the same basic design. Meanwhile you have the Manankon (also called an onager [wild ass] or mangonel) which is a single arm, torsion powered, stone throwing, indirect fire engine. Then we have beam slings (also called Mangonels) that are trebuchet like, but men pull on the short end of the beam. What we call Trebuchets use a counterweight on the short of of the beam. Springalds, I've also seem is spelt springal, are flexion powered, like a longbow, with only a single arm that is pulled back. When released the arm strikes the back/butt end of the bolt to 'slap' it at the enemy. Arbalests are insanely strong crossbows, flexion powered. If you think this is coplicated, research cannon of the 13th and 14 centuries... "Surrender, for I have thee by the Rabinet!" "That's not my Rabinet, that is my Basalisk!"
If crossbow bolts were light enough to slow down that much more dramatically beyond 60 yards, why didn't bolt-makers simply shorten the wooden portion of the shaft and add a longer head? Speed would be compromised, sure, but the extra mass/range would make up for that when the situation called for it. On that topic, this idea might be a bit "out there" - I have no knowledge of medieval metallurgy - but an all-iron bolt that's thinnest at the back, with its CoM rather far forward, and perhaps with a slot or something to insert some kind of fletching, could be practical.
About the ping pong ball vs. the stone: Just want to clear something up - there is not more air resistance on the ping pong ball, it's just that the same amount of force on both objects will have a greater effect on the lighter object. The air resistance on both objects is the same, but Newton's second law is the thing at work here.
You are correct that more speed causes more air resistance. I meant that for two objects with the same speed and surface area, the force due to air resistance is the same. What I'm saying is that the properties of the material or the mass of the object does not lead to more air resistance, but the same force will decelerate the heavier object more. What you're saying is that if you give two objects some initial speed, and one speed is greater than the other, then that object will experience more air resistance. That is correct, but it's not to do with what I'm saying.
@@tilmanrotationalinvariant2257 I think air resistance on a smooth surface is independent of the material, but drag is proportional to v squared in turbulent flow which is the case with a rock, stone, pebble, or ping pong ball
Dear Lloyd, Where is your Wednesday video? I'm pretty sure you were supposed to post these on Wednesdays and Fridays for four months, and it's already Thursday. You should be embarrassed. You know, because you said you would be. Yours, A subscriber who saw that motivational video
I'm not entirely convinced though .. I'm no 'expect', but wouldn't it be a lot more 'stressful' for the arrow to try and force its way through a breastplate, than being launched from a bow ?.. an arrow that snaps when it impacts a 90kg man - not including his armor - is gonna dent the breastplate, at most
+Linkxsc exactly, but the arse-end of the arrow will keep moving .. I expect the result would look like what Lindy showed, with the wrench .. if the arrow can withstand the strain put on it, when the front suddenly comes to a halt, but the rear end keeps pushing forward like nothing had happen, then it would puncture the armor and keep going inwards .. if it can't, it should just snap, waste all of its kinetic energy, and do absolutely nothing to the guy you just hit
The real trick is to practice being hit by heavier and heavier arrows until you become immune to the entirely.
Connorchap Creations works with bullets too
Start with a 22 short, slowly make your way from that to rifle rounds, then shotgun slugs, then 20mms, then an 88 just to tie it altogether
Video game logic
phys resist caps at 85% m8
And NOT be FRENCH.. 😊
I was building up the tolerance perfectly. Untill a chap in the enemy line brought a crossbow.
I used to be an adventurer like you
It makes me snicker to hear Lindy always default the opponent as being a Frenchman.
I know there's an historical reason for it, but it amuses me none the less.
+sugarnads In the colonies it's "chuckle."
Well I don't know where you lot are from, but I'm American, so I'll say it how I damned well please. :D
+MysticJhn It makes me agree with him
+MysticJhn "bloody well please" :D
+MysticJhn Could you explain for the foreigner, what's wrong with Frenchmen? Is it contemporary, or was there kind of an historical event?
I can't quite put my finger on Lindy's nationality...
+Windra dyne Didnt you hear? He´s French
+Windra dyne Me too, now he claims to be British I start doubting he's English.
Scotch?
He’s clearly Flemish
I've heard the word "Frenchman" in the video. He must be French.
So at a very long range, you realy don't want to be hit by a longbow.
Because a man Who could throw a bow that far would be a fearsome opponent.
He truly is a Brit! haha
hhahahah
Rather be hit by a bow than a arrow
I was scared you were going to break it into your eye.
+SmarterEveryDay How long will it take for people to notice that you've commented on this video?
about seven months
Hey!:)
SmarterEveryDay hmmmm, mercedes beeeennnzzzzz
Charlemagne The King oh wow just noticed that smartereveryday commented
Did anyone notice?
He's British.
+ZURATAMA1324 He might be a german spy =P
+Lavrentivs I am ze British, ja
+MRKapcer13 perfect impression omg haha 😂
Ja ich bin Einglander schweinhund!
Not at first.
You need a thick shaft. Otherwise, no matter the poundage, the penetration is not going to be very effective.
I felt violated just reading that.
you could not have phrased that beter
I need an adult...
Sebastian Grygiel that's what she said.
It has a pointy head, a thick shaft giving the perfect amount of penetration.
sometimes the tiniest moments of silly humor in these videos totally gets me. like when he pretended to throw the rock and you hear 'ow!' i just wasnt expecting it there and cracked up
+Jacob Lewis also when he said 'specialist shooting-frenchemen-who-are-a-long-way-away arrows.'
+Jacob Lewis also the comment on the end page. god i love lindy.
I always stay for the little lego man yelling "Lindy Beige!"
I also like the droll comments that are behind the Lego man.
Me too
Giordano Julián Cervera I try, but he's got a way of making his videos much longer than they need be.
@@oiudatropen9548 And thank goodness for that!
Yes
I have the lingering suspicion that you might be British...
Waddaya talking about he's about as french as they come
He's clearly Mexican. He says so multiple times in the video.
...and so the army of slingers was defeated, even though they had an unlimited supply of ping pong balls
+ixtl guul They took up new jobs as deep sea recovery divers.
+Slayer Jesse...and Ping Pongs became extinct
It is why the Pongolian Empire didn't last very long.
they just weren't getting the ping-pong balls going fast enough. Get them to around Mach 1 and they pack quite a wallop.
and there was much rejoicing. (yaaaay)
Thank god you reminded us you're British, I couldn't tell otherwise.
Oh--is he British? How can you tell?
obviously because he says leeeverage
He and Jeremy Clarkson are the most British looking humans on this planet.
Wait, Lindy isn't a Japanese schoolgirl?
@@ericliu2277 Mocking the French is an ancient British passtime.
And here I thought that crossbow bolts were heavy. Great. My whole life has been a lie.
I dunno where that comes from. But yeah carrying around a bag of bolts is far less encumbering than a quiver of arrows
I think it's because many people imagine them being a solid metal rod. Maybe associating it with it's name, which makes them think of bolts in modern context as pieces of construction hardware :)
Quicksilver_Cookie half life red hot rebar
Yeah I have a crossbow and the weapon itself weighs as much as like 30 bolts maybe idk it’s a weird thing
10:26 the french might dodge by not walking straight due to the wine he drank earlier
Source: I'm french
I'm getting the impression that Lindybeige is British.
He says so, but I'm not sure I believe it.
break long stick
now you have two stick
both are harder to break than before
stick always win
+Soos the Mechanic but what will win, stick or pneumatic press? i think ze press always win!
make it triple sticks pls
+kekejojo1212 no, get smaller stick. Stick win.
+Soos the Mechanic Burn the stick?
+John Johnson Burn it with FIRE!
I really wouldn't want to be hit by a longbow at any range.
+LocoCaesarIV And thats the real take away from this video.
I just imagined someone going up to someone else and hitting them on the head with a long bow. It's more comedic than it sounds.
Better a longbow than an arrow.
Yes, id much prefer being hit by a recurve bow, less surface area hitting your head because of the bends
But you could get one of the ends into your eye!! A mite inconvenient, that!
You're British? You should'a told us earlier.
+mouthpiece200 I thought he was French or something.
I thought he was Turkish.
Not an Eskimo?
Not French?
not african?
“You’ve got a length of wood that would rather stay still, frankly”
I often find myself rewatching Lindybeige videos from a few years prior. I've already seen them and know the information.
However, they are pleasant to watch and his jokes never lose their effect. Well done! Wishing I could "thumbs up" this again.
Lindybeige the science sage.
Bit of Lindy to start my day, marvellous!
and a bit of lindy to end mine
+Pikminarecool And to... end mine... in the morning.
And, yes, I said Frenchman, because I'm English
If anyone's interested, the equations for at projectile in a vaccum are (y(t)=½*g*(t^2)+v_0*sin(θ)*t+s_0y, x(t)=v_0*cos(θ)*t+s_0x), this is ignoring wind resistance, then drag can be calculated with this equation: F=½*C*A*ρ*(v^2)
F=force
y(t)=displacement in y-direction at t
x(t)=displacement in x-direction at t
t=time
g=acceleration due to gravity
v_0=initial velocity
θ=angle between x-axis and point of fire
s_0y=initial displacement in y-direction
s_0x=initial displacement in x-direction
C=drag coefficient (different for every shape)
A=largest cross sectional area in direction of motion
ρ=density of the fluid the object is moving through
v=velocity
Thank you, really useful for everyone who didn't go to middle school.
Eric Pive
Thank you for that great and thoughtful comment!
McRaylie You're welcome.
Nice, I like how you wrote what all the variables mean, makes it somewhat decodable if you remember PEMDAS. Thx
@@freshrockpapa-e7799 Ah, so you've never been to a Middle school on a third world country, perhaps this might help, I'm about to finish university (I'm from Mexico) and this is the first time I have ever seen that equation.
“Adjustable spanner”
Huh, so “throw a spanner in the works” & “this throws a wrench in things” aren’t just figuratively the same they’re literally the same.
notice the british one is more poetic so no they arent the same
bossmanviking they have the same literal meaning, used in exactly the same context. They are the same phrase but in different nations.
does that address what i said though
@@Jessie_Helms what are you even pointing out anyway, just because you had finally relised something obvious ?
bossmanviking yes, because you said they aren’t the same but they’re literally the same phrase, just with a word translated from one version of English to another.
Neither phrase is poetic, or if they are they’re equally poetic.
tl;dr: a = F/m
+Lttlemoi yeah, you forgot p=mv... you know the ping-pong ball and stuff. And also F = 0.5*A*C*rho*v^2
+Pavel Cherepansky I find the quickest way to explain it is
KE=mv^2
with air resistance is proportional to v so the faster it's going, the faster it looses energy
people's eyes tend to glaze over at fluid dynamics equations, but since only one variable is changing it's a simple direct relationship
DynamicWorlds Good point
+Lttlemoi tl;dr: Lindybeige is British.
+Lttlemoi Yeah but that would make a boring video
I don't think I'd be very happy to be hit by a long bow arrow at SHORT range either.
'I called it an spanner...'
Well how dare you use the words common to your native language. I demand you speak 'real' English like we have in America.
This is a sarcastic post, please do not murder me natives of England.
Jeremy Smith you stole our language not the other way round you twonk
great..now you're stealing their famous sarcasm as well! damn you yankee! p.s. yeah i know this comment is 5 years old :D
With MODERN archery they have a measurement called "Spine Weight" which refers to the strength of the arrows shaft. The purpose of having the correct spine weight, in relation to the poundage of your bow, is to help the arrow fly true'er through the air.
When you fire an arrow, the force of the string bends the arrow, as Lindy described, and indeed if the Spine weight is too light, the arrow could break, BUT that is not the primary function of a correctly weighted arrow (shaft).
Because of the force on the back end of the arrow, the arrow bends, and it will continue to bend back and forth throughout it's flight, this effect lessens as the arrow fly's.
BUT, if the spine weight is to low, or to high for that matter, the arrow will not have straighten out before it hits its target, resulting in the arrow not hitting its target straight on, but rather hitting its target on an angle.
resulting in less penetration. if the arrow is correctly "weighted" for the bow, the arrow should hit its targed straight on, achieving maximum penetration.
SO in conclusion, the thickness of medieval arrows, was not just to prevent snapping the arrows, but rather to ensure a clean, direct and straight, hit on the target.
Have you seen SmarterEveryDay's (Destin's) video about this? That's how I learned about the archer's paradox. He meets a guy who can shoot an aspirin tablet clean out of the air. It's awesome.
The weight of the point is also an important factor in calculating optimum spine.
Science!
In the US we don't throw stone, we throw pounds.
what part do you live in? In the heatland, we say rocks or stones
+Ellie Bierman that was a weight measurements joke. Brits weigh themselves in stone, Americans in pound and sane people in kg.
+GigaBoost Oh, that makes sense, thanks for clarifying
And all you idiots (except maybe gigaboost) still use miles. Hell, I think your miles are different, too. Now I just have to figure out how to turn that into a joke. And also, I don’t mean to offend anyone with my use of the word idiots. I swear like a sailor.
James Forgie that's ok I sail like a vulgar person
Beige! Thank you Lloyd for another great video!
it beeeeeeends :3
Man, I love those endplates.
lindybeige: he's british.
Lloyd is the perfect representation of how an englishman looks like in my head.
Why is this American man saying spanner instead of wrench and spelling "lever" like a Canadian?
+Quantum Custodian In spanish we call that a "French key"
+Altrantis in swedish it's a "shift key"
+Quantum Custodian Good god he's australian he's just not wearing his lederhösen, you racist
Gloin79
Remember when australia fought the ottomans and then caused WW1?
Patrik Pålsson
Wonder why it's called a key to begin with, it makes no sense XD
the ending text made me laugh so hard
I have a feeling Lindybeige is polish.
+Braydon rantall He mentioned shooting a longbow at the French, he's definitely English (I know him personally too, that helps, and I'm French, that doesn't!!!!). ;)
David Tetard Twas a bit of ol australian sarcasm but thank you anyway and enjoy your day
Braydon rantall No worries, I took it as sarcasm.
+David Tetard Do you taunt him, sir?
Complexities like this are why I carry a gun.
You carry a gun because a now obsolete weapon is complex? Or did u just wanna tell people u carry a gun?
But what are you going to do if you get mugged by a frenchman? If you are concerned about your safety, always carry a longbow!
That or surrender documents....
Sekrit documints?
Documents that settle the French terms of surrender?
>Stone, Pebble
Lindy we use those terms here in the states too. Granted, pebble just means "tiny rocks" and stone is used to refer to what something's made out of.
+RedShocktrooper Funny how dialect differences are usually like 0.1% of the language.
+jony4real tells that to germans ...
@@rosso4122 or Spanish speakers for that matter
Arrows, bolts, quarrels, stones... Got it. But what about the throwing of sword pommels?
Don't be a barbarian. The only true way to use pommels is to shoot them with a bow.
@@charliebrownies4585 true, but not if you want to end him _rightly_
That's Skallagrim not Lloyd.
arrow thickness is for penetration not for withstanding the rather gentle force of a bowstring releasing. You can shoot a thin arrow at something easily but what does it do when it hits something hard, the shaft breaks off the head losing the majority of its energy. a thicker shaft is so when the arrow hits its target it doesn't break but instead transfers all its energy to the target.
+grazzitdvram But to launch heavy arrow to reasonable distances you need harder launch and this is where material resistance comes in. You cant really make millions of arrows from wood so people had to be creative.
+grazzitdvram Hes confusing arrow spine with arrow thickness. Hes kind of right, you need the arrow to be the right stiffness for it to fly properly
+grazzitdvram Have you ever hit yourself in the arm with a bowstring? Apparently not, because otherwise you would know that it freaking hurts and that a bowstring isn't gentle. So they made the arrows thicker to be able to make the bows stronger, however thicker arrows certainly help to prevent them from breaking aswell. As a German I'd say they hit two flies with one flap, but I don't think that makes sence in English ^^
+Tom Clark Spine = thickness more or less, when you only have wood to work with.
+Tom Clark If the only suitable material you have is wood, then thickness IS how strong the spine is.
lindybeige i have a question:
what do missle troops do when they are out of ammo
+Tiger King Swear at the enemy.
wigster600 sounds like a good idea
i think this would heavily rely on the scenario. in a siege on the defending side i suppose they just wouldn't shoot arrows then. but what about battles? i like this question.
+Tiger King Hide behind the pikes?
Cry
"a man who could throw a longbow that far would be a fearsome opponent" I lost it. Lindybeige, your humor is simply smashing.
"when you want to shoot a frenchman who's not very far away, you might want to clonk him with a really heavy stick." sound advice from lindy :D :D :D
If you ever do that again, please wear eye protection!
Around 5:00 I think you are looking for the physics and engineering term called buckling, which is dependent upon a thing called slenderness ratio. Look it up, I think that will further clarify your explanation.
So that's the difference between shaft and flight arrows. They have them in D&D, and I didn't know the difference in real life. Interesting.
Lindybeige, please forgive me this quite private question, but is there a possibility that you are british?
You better not be french. You might get an arrow as an answer (I hear he is quite the shot with bows and longbows).
A rock is a stone, but a stone isn't a rock. This isn't just a British way of calling them, it's the proper definitions of the words. Rock means A *large* rugged mass of hard mineral material or stone. While a stone is just any sized mass of hard mineral material.
The point might've been about how big a stone a rock is for Americans. I'm an American, and we call almost any stone, including pebbles, on occasion, rocks.
Thank you gorgeous
I only have 1 visible scar, and it was because i used a lighter arrow on a heavier bow. Be careful with bows, they're not toys. Arrows breaking when firing can go in any direction; in my case, through my hand
+Derpy McDerpinstein You need RoSPA.
+Ethan Porter Relevant only in that they're both ranged weapons, but it always amuses me imagining the look on the first boomerang-user's expression and the panic overtaking him as the implement came back in his general direction.
+Derpy McDerpinstein your name explains all of it :)
+Solemn Howler You do realise that proper hunting/war boomerangs didn't really come back at you? For that same reason you've just described.
+Solemn Howler ....please explain what i said back to me, i don't really understand your reply
As a modern archer (Olympic recurve) you did an awesome job on this topic. Everything relates directly to modern archery Thank You!
Uh, you talked exclusively about the missiles (arrows) and not at all about ballistics: the science of the motion of projectiles in flight or the flight characteristics of a projectile. I suppose you are going to say that the science of missiles themselves is also ballistics. That would be a secondary meaning. But really, we expected you to talk about missile trajectories!! Meh.
Smarter Every Day did an amazing video on the "archer's paradox", explaining SO MUCH about the physics and material science of arrows.
Aha! He missed Wednesday and Friday! Let the embarrassment begin!
+GorrilaJohnson SHAME SHAME SHAME!
+GorrilaJohnson DING DING DING SHAME SHAME SHAME
6:57 "OW" hahahaha
Awesome to see the videos coming so quickly these days!
I'm so glad you're making this kind of videos again. This is what I subscribed for all these years ago.
You've left out one or two important stress factors! As the archer draws the bow, his fingers impart some twist on the string which effectively pre-loads the back or notch end of the arrow, at full draw, such that it wants to untwist against the firmly fitting notch which for a righhanded archer is in a counter clockwise direction. This has the effect of applying a torque to the arrow which lies partly on the hand of the archer and resting against the left side of the bow stave. The force increases the bend force along the stave as does the fact that the arrow isn't being released straight but at an angle equal to the tangent(-1) of half the bow stave thickness to the length of draw. The arrow upon release with the twist imparted and the moment of force due to inertia wants to bend itself around the bow stave upon release before straightening in flight. This doesn't occur as much in some centre or "through shot " bows that release the arrow in a straight line and release aids are used here to prevent the string twisting under the fingers which otherwise could throw the arrow off centre. Now if the arrow is TOO stiff then it bends less around the bow and for a right handed shooter will deflect over to the left. If it is not stiff enough then it will not fully stabilise in flight but "wobble" and initially tend to the right or even snap with the stresses.
Arrows do in fact have to be graded by stiffness for this reason by both the draw weight of the bow and by the length of draw...simple physics can be used but in medievel times archers, fletchers and bowyers all knew what grade of arrow was needed. The barrelling thickness and length may also have been determined by the type of arrowhead being fitted. The heavier the head the greater the initial inertial moment at release, the greater the force alplied and the thiccker and stiffer the arrow stave needed to be. These days we use Port Orford Cedar for wooden staves. Back then ash was used with harder timber sometimes spliced in nearer the tip to improve strength and lessen the chances of the stave breaking near the tip upon impact especially with armour. The thought and knowledge and skill of these medievel fletchers and makers of arrow blanks was fabulous. That's right, I used the word " Fabulous" because I'm English!
Thank you very much for the explanation. You failed to mention WHY you are British, though. :)
You also call "guns" "Rooty-Tooty Point and Shooties". Because you're British.
+Deinonuchus He's also not 5 years old ;P
+FortisConscius Yeah but a full video knly using this king of vocabulary would be hilarious.
Rooty-Tooty is the single least british thing I've ever heard, sounds very american to me.
+Deinonuchus Nah, more likely a shoo-ah (Cockney) or a piece. Not as in ringpiece (that's something entirely different).
+English Heart "He drew his hot-cross and there was claret."
Hmmm, space archery seems to have great potential as a future method of warfare
Or sport.
+raglanheuser I bet space vikings will have actual horned helmets. In space it will make sense somehow.
It could conceivably go on forever at the same speed unless it hit something, so yea I'd say it would be quite effective. But I don't know how low gravity would effect tension, could you even fire a bow in space?
yeah elastic forces would still work, if you were in earth orbit though i doubt the arrow would achieve escape velocity and most likely would eventually fall or stay in orbit as dangerous space garbage. i can just imagine a future satellite being impaled by a rogue arrow fired decades prior lol
+raglanheuser The main problem is launching - no atmosphere means no aerodynamic stabilisation, so the slightest bit of spin and you're as likely to hit with the middle of the arrow as with either end.
In orbit, things are even worse - over time, tidal forces would tend to leave the arrow pointing straight up and down, so eventually anything it orbits into will be hit lengthways rather than point-first...
we call that adjustable spanner, english key / adjustable key in my country :)
+Crabm38 SSSH don't tell anyone, but it is a Swedish invention. From an Englishman.
in Spanish those things are called "llave" or "key"
In Danish it's actually a "Swedish key"
+Peter Welsh welshy46 Bahco made the most common design in use today for adjustable spanner, but there was also an English design and a French one, too.
+Crabm38 I call it an adjustable nut rounder.
I am beginning to suspect Lindybeige might be British...
Most underappreciated comic relief.
Rewatching this video semi-regularly, and it just strikes me again and again how incredibly well rythmed and produced (yet simple) it is.
1:52 - when I realized this balsa wood was greatly more interesting than it appeared.
:D
3:00 - How many bloody pieces of balsa wood fell on you at this firework display? You poor poor man.
I bet Ygritte would be able to throw a longbow that far...
I think that the term you're looking for is 'Cross-sectional density' which is the number that makes the biggest difference in drag and penetration.
Also known as ballistic coefficient
yes. it is not all explained by saying "inertia" 100 times
investing in a new hobby (bow and arrow) 350$
paying for archery lessons 50$ per session
listening to a British man describe dynamic spine. priceless
I like how many of Lindy's videos are so spontaneous; it's obvious here, when you see his surprise, not expecting the rock to move when he blew against it.
Silly Lindy, a fearsome opponent is one who could throw a pommel that far, you would never be safe in battle against him.
The proper term to use for the ping-pong ball vs. stone example (yes, I said 'proper' and 'stone'... because you're British) is density, which is mass/volume.
If you had used spaghetti for your demonstration you would have had a bad time making your point :)
+Adrien Perié Are yo reffering to this www.math.psu.edu/belmonte/spaghetti.html ?
We got it you're British. I am an American. Although we may be two peoples, separated by a common language, Americans DO understand the English version of the English language.
I like on your are surprised by your own demonstration. " ooh I'm amazed it actually moved " " oh it broke a lot more easily that I thought ! "
We get it, your British.
haha
But seriously, this was actually really informative. Thanks :)
Lloyd! You missed a Wednesday. You should be very embarrassed...
+Sam Marsh And a friday.
Hey good sir! I have a very curious question that I hope you can answer me with a video hopefuly. Why in Medieval times (both early and middle period) infantry no longer used javelins like Roman Legionaries?
Taras Rud' Even in the ancient times there were lots of throw away infantry men (especially the in "barbarian" societyes and even in pre Marian Rome when Roman soldiers needed to buy their own equipment) who still had javelins both for throwing before charging into battle and for skirmishing purposes.
When it comes to the nobility why didn't they at least had javelins? Ofcourse many of them preferred horse combat but for example in Dark Ages England (500-1066 AD) the nobility didn't had that much in terms of cavalry if I'm not mistaken. They surrounded themselves by housecarls type bodyguards who fought on foot. Why didn't they had javelins? And the question can also be put to the levy soldiers? Later in the middle period of the Medieval age (1000- 1300/1400) many kingdoms could field archers and training a man just the basics of the bow can take entire years since the bow is a difficult weapon. It would be much easier, faster and probably cheaper to equip the levy troops with javelins who are easy to learn how to throw and also do a lot of damage in close range (especially to poorly or semy armoured foes).
Let's go back the Dark Ages. Considering that (even for the Christian Germanic and Celtic kingdoms) warfare didn't change that much from since thy were just war mongering barbarians in the 300's and 400's why didn't they kept the javelins? Again, they would be cheap, easy to handle and can do a lot of damage and can penetrate (if I'm not wrong) even the best armour available back then which was chain mail and/or iron scale armour. Now I know that the Irish Celts used a type of javelin which had great effect in the Dark Ages and also the Scots and Welsh warriors had javelins but they were only used by levy troops whose purpose was to skirmish with the enemy. Why didn't the melee levies also used javelins before charging into battle?
Taras Rud' An extra javelin would probably not be that much expensive.
MrWubbles That would be the case if we were talking only about the 16th and 17th or maybe even 15th century when indeed Europe reached it's peak in creating armor. But if we talk the Dark Ages (400/500-1000 AD) then the best armour available was cahin mail and/or maybe supplemented by scale armour (things that if I'm not wrong can be penetrated by a heavy javelin similar to a Roman pilum which was especially designed for that). This type of armour was only available to the nobility and their retinues/bodyguards. If we talk about the the next period (1000-1400) then we talk about the appearance of eary plate armour which is powerful enough to stop a javelin however this kind of armour was still available only to the upper class (knights and nobility) while the levy peasant troops and men at arms had access only to gambisom/lether and chain mail if they were lucky.
By all accontts if we take into consideration all of these facts then I think the question: why didn't medieval infantry men continued to use precursor javelins before charging into melee just like Roman legionaries is a quite legimate one. Mind you I'm not really big into military history myself but this why I put this question.
Radovan Kuburic But why? Why didn't they also used javelins? The ancestors of all these peoples used javelins in battle and also had interactions with the Romans who used javelins before charging into battle. Also, I have to reafirm that my question is rather "why didn't melee medieval infantry used javelins before charging into battle" and NOT "why javelins were not used in the Medieval period" (which obiviously wasn't the case).
Radovan Kuburic Fair enough. "Retinues of nobles" I would call Men-at-arms, but the urban militias and mercenary armies are definitely a good point.
Why didn't those people use javelins? Well crossbows replaced javelins for many people. Also the infantry were not using big shields any more like Hoplites and Legionaries did but more often had polearms. Maybe it's less convenient to use a javelin with a polearm than when you are fighting with sword and shield.
I love you Lloyd.
Leave it to my favorite RUclipsr to take advantage of firework waste
I love you Lindybeige, you're like the medieval-obsessed great uncle I never had
Now please explain how ballistas were used. They don't make much sense to me. With a really big catapult throwing round projectiles you could knock down buildings or set it to make a line drive and bowl down over dozens of french men. But a ballista seems like it wouldn't do much devastation. If it hits a sturdy stone building it'll just create more business for masons. If you aim it straight into the front line of troops I could see it going through maybe 6 men before stopping and then the crew has to spend 10 minutes reloading it. Unless you are trying to kill large moving beasts I don't get it.
And what were gigantic Crossbows on Towers or maybe on wheels called? I'm pretty sure Catapults; Trebuchets, Onagers or Mangonels where the stone stuff flinging guys, and ballistae the giant arrow stuff flinging guys.
Giant crossbows are usually called Ballista. Wheeled towers are called belfries. Smaller ballista shooting large arrows/quarrels are scorpions or cheroballista, depending on type, or springbalds(I think) in medieval times. Alot of books are not consistant in the terms they use though.
A large problem with naming seige weapons is that they sound similar, but function differently while having a vaguelt similar shape. That and one type of engine might have 3 or four names. depending on where it was used.
Some engines were Torsion powered while others were Flexion powered.
Then you have Direct fire vs indirect fire.
A Ballista is a tortion powered, stone throwing, direct fire engine that is 'crossbow shaped' while a Scorpion is a torsion powered, bolt-throwing, direct fire eninge of the same basic design.
Meanwhile you have the Manankon (also called an onager [wild ass] or mangonel) which is a single arm, torsion powered, stone throwing, indirect fire engine.
Then we have beam slings (also called Mangonels) that are trebuchet like, but men pull on the short end of the beam. What we call Trebuchets use a counterweight on the short of of the beam.
Springalds, I've also seem is spelt springal, are flexion powered, like a longbow, with only a single arm that is pulled back. When released the arm strikes the back/butt end of the bolt to 'slap' it at the enemy.
Arbalests are insanely strong crossbows, flexion powered.
If you think this is coplicated, research cannon of the 13th and 14 centuries...
"Surrender, for I have thee by the Rabinet!"
"That's not my Rabinet, that is my Basalisk!"
"The inertia of the head is so much greater than the wood behind it ..."
We love it when you talk dirty.
:-P
I love how you are still using the Frenchman as the example
+Bit Maid It's worked for a thousand years why stop now?
Saruman38 Could you tell me in what way is He racist for using the French as an example?
+Saruman38 French isn't a race, genius.
I come back to this video every year to remind myself that Lindy is intact...
Yup, British.
Lindybeige : "I'm British"
Welshman : "you're English"
Scotsman : "you're English"
Irishman : "I have a lengthy list of historical grievances"
Love, "Because I´m British".......
But Lindy, what's the best tool for _stuffing_ the French?
I'm American so I lack experience in French stuffing.
+Daniel Feldspar The traditional British recipe for stuffed frenchmen is, of course, arrows best served at long range.
Disclaimer: The results obtained at Azincourt (or Patay) are not typical for Franco-English encounters.
@@2adamast Castillon might be a better measure....... Who won the 100 Years War?
Lindybeige YOU PROMISED more videos!
Yes, he is British.
If crossbow bolts were light enough to slow down that much more dramatically beyond 60 yards, why didn't bolt-makers simply shorten the wooden portion of the shaft and add a longer head? Speed would be compromised, sure, but the extra mass/range would make up for that when the situation called for it.
On that topic, this idea might be a bit "out there" - I have no knowledge of medieval metallurgy - but an all-iron bolt that's thinnest at the back, with its CoM rather far forward, and perhaps with a slot or something to insert some kind of fletching, could be practical.
Lindyhow about a post on the battle of the light brigade !!!
That's not an adjustable spanner it's a right handed nut rounder
About the ping pong ball vs. the stone:
Just want to clear something up - there is not more air resistance on the ping pong ball, it's just that the same amount of force on both objects will have a greater effect on the lighter object.
The air resistance on both objects is the same, but Newton's second law is the thing at work here.
No. The ping pong ball initially goes faster, which means that it will have even more force on it.
You are correct that more speed causes more air resistance.
I meant that for two objects with the same speed and surface area, the force due to air resistance is the same. What I'm saying is that the properties of the material or the mass of the object does not lead to more air resistance, but the same force will decelerate the heavier object more.
What you're saying is that if you give two objects some initial speed, and one speed is greater than the other, then that object will experience more air resistance. That is correct, but it's not to do with what I'm saying.
Joel Gabriel ok
@@joelgabriel3093 If I would be nit picking I'd say that the material the surface is made of naturally makes a difference;)
@@tilmanrotationalinvariant2257 I think air resistance on a smooth surface is independent of the material, but drag is proportional to v squared in turbulent flow which is the case with a rock, stone, pebble, or ping pong ball
spanner=range, lorry=truck, torch=flashlight, Macintosh=raincoat, aluminium=aluminum....I got it now
Dear Lloyd,
Where is your Wednesday video? I'm pretty sure you were supposed to post these on Wednesdays and Fridays for four months, and it's already Thursday. You should be embarrassed. You know, because you said you would be.
Yours,
A subscriber who saw that motivational video
Are you going to do a video on fire arrows at some point?
Agreed, as well as a video on how ridicilous Hollywood's version of a "viking burial" is.
We get it, your speech is influenced by Britain's culture.
Would be weird if it wasn't, wouldn't it?
I'm not entirely convinced though .. I'm no 'expect', but wouldn't it be a lot more 'stressful' for the arrow to try and force its way through a breastplate, than being launched from a bow ?.. an arrow that snaps when it impacts a 90kg man - not including his armor - is gonna dent the breastplate, at most
+Zifflin The arrow is moving fastest at launch.
+Zifflin Don't forget, most of the weight is at the front. So the second it hits the guy, the heaviest portion has already struck and stopped moving.
+Linkxsc exactly, but the arse-end of the arrow will keep moving .. I expect the result would look like what Lindy showed, with the wrench .. if the arrow can withstand the strain put on it, when the front suddenly comes to a halt, but the rear end keeps pushing forward like nothing had happen, then it would puncture the armor and keep going inwards .. if it can't, it should just snap, waste all of its kinetic energy, and do absolutely nothing to the guy you just hit
*****
Eeh, they tend to just vibrate a lot with the arse end wagging in the air, if something stops them.
+Linkxsc the arrow doesn't bend like I would have expected it to, but, it did snap, and did basically nothing
"Two kinds of arrows: Ones for hitting a Frenchmen at close range, and ones for hitting a Frenchmen far away."
Stop making a deal about you being British. Get over your nationality!
I certainly can't.