Muzzleloading Forum
 
HomeGalleryFAQSearchRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 Slow motion round ball VS steel armor

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
FrontierGander
Forum
Forum
avatar

Male Number of posts : 14393
Age : 33
Location : Boncarbo,Colorado
Registration date : 2008-05-19

PostSubject: Slow motion round ball VS steel armor   August 12th 2017, 12:19 pm

Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.frontiermuzzleloading.com
BrownBear



Number of posts : 175
Age : 66
Location : Alaska
Registration date : 2017-04-19

PostSubject: Re: Slow motion round ball VS steel armor   August 12th 2017, 1:06 pm

I was greatly unimpressed by the amount of spark coming off the frizzen, but it did fire. Eventually. I sure couldn't live with that.

Neat detail on the ball strike though, as you said!
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Kentucky Colonel
FML's
FML's
avatar

Male Number of posts : 1376
Age : 109
Location : Luna
Registration date : 2015-10-28

PostSubject: Re: Slow motion round ball VS steel armor   August 12th 2017, 3:59 pm

Agreed. That flint/frizzen needs attention. 

However, it was fun after that. 

My understanding of history provides some (maybe) interesting context 
and a question.

The famous three finger insult of Britain (think 'the bird' with three fingers) 
dates back to the English bow and the French response to its deadly impact. 
'The Battle of Agincourt' immortalized by Shakespeare in Henry V, introduces 
the military power of the British bow. 

Afterward, the French made it policy to cut off the bow fingers of any Englishman 
they chose to release upon capture. Those English bows that had cost them so much 
required years of training. (Hence the English three fingered insult... "We've still got 
our fingers, you dicks!" is the meaning.) Crossbowmen, on the other hand, were put 
to death. They defeated noble armor and took no time learning how to do it. Nobles 
considered it a 'cheat' when they died at the hands of a crossbowman. 

To my limited knowledge? Black powder weapons did not encounter the same response. 
And, I know, despite the failure to penetrate armor in the video? Black powder weapons DID. 
I have seen the results on armor myself in the Metropolitan Art Museum in New York and 
history books also record the impact of BP on noble armor.

So, know the indisputable and readable truth. BP firearms ended traditional nobles' armor. 
Kevlar is the modern equivalent, but does not carry the same social context.

Yes, I enjoyed the video. It raised a lot of interesting thoughts.

So, why, did they choose to show a round ball defeated by simple armor? 
Why was the strike on the angle? And, WHY were BP soldiers treated differently than 
crossbowmen?

_________________
"One of the sanest, surest, and most generous joys of life comes from being happy 
over the good fortune of others." 
― Robert Heinlein


Florida Muzzleloaders Association 
Central Florida Muzzleloaders 
Green River Rifle Works Collectors Association
NMLRA


Last edited by Kentucky Colonel on August 12th 2017, 6:17 pm; edited 3 times in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile
falcon

avatar

Male Number of posts : 1273
Age : 78
Location : Southwest, Oklahoma
Registration date : 2012-05-28

PostSubject: Re: Slow motion round ball VS steel armor   August 12th 2017, 5:26 pm

Thanks for the video.   The armor wearer may have gotten a good bruise from that shot.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
BrownBear



Number of posts : 175
Age : 66
Location : Alaska
Registration date : 2017-04-19

PostSubject: Re: Slow motion round ball VS steel armor   August 12th 2017, 5:53 pm

@Kentucky Colonel wrote:
And, I know, despite the failure to penetrate armor in the video? Black powder weapons DID. 
I have seen the results on armor myself in the Metropolitan Art Museum in New York and 
history books also record the impact of BP on noble armor.
I'm a retired commercial photographer with a little experience in photographing bullets in flight. Here's my reaction to the vid:

Unless the folks doing the photography owned or invested mega-bux in high speed cameras, it's a pure setup. If the ball was fired at anything like standard shooting velocities, they better have a very special camera.

Idle speculation because I really don't know what kind of camera gear they used. But dollars to donuts based upon the impact of the ball on the armor, they were trying to overcome their limited camera budget with vast reductions in powder charge.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Marty
Site Moderator &
Site Moderator &
avatar

Male Number of posts : 3251
Age : 61
Location : Massachusetts
Registration date : 2009-02-03

PostSubject: Re: Slow motion round ball VS steel armor   August 14th 2017, 9:40 am

Cool
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Slow motion round ball VS steel armor   

Back to top Go down
 
Slow motion round ball VS steel armor
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Frontier Muzzleloading :: Muzzleloading Topic :: Traditional Muzzleloading :: Muzzleloading Media-
Jump to: