Editing English longbow (section)

==== Modern testing ====

In an early modern test by [[Saxton Pope]], a direct hit from a steel [[bodkin point]] penetrated Damascus [[mail (armour)|mail]] armour.{{sfn|Pope|2003|loc=[http://www.gutenberg.org/catalog/world/readfile?pageno=30&fk_files=17210 Chapter IV.--Archery in general, p.30]}}<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.royalarmouries.org/what-we-do/research/analytical-projects/armour-piercing-arrowheads |title=Royal Armouries: 6. Armour-piercing arrowheads |access-date=28 September 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160324192153/https://royalarmouries.org/what-we-do/research/analytical-projects/armour-piercing-arrowheads |archive-date=24 March 2016 |url-status=dead }}</ref>

A 2006 test was made by Matheus Bane using a {{convert|75|lbf|abbr=on}} draw (at {{cvt|28|in|cm}}) bow, shooting at {{convert|10|yd|m}}; according to Bane's calculations, this would be approximately equivalent to a {{convert|110|lbf|abbr=on}} bow at {{convert|250|yd|m}}.{{sfn|Bane|2006}} Measured against a replica of the thinnest contemporary [[gambeson]] (padded jacket) armour, a {{convert|905|gr|g}} needle bodkin and a 935 grain curved broadhead penetrated over {{convert|3.5|in|mm}}. (gambeson armour could be up to twice as thick as the coat tested; in Bane's opinion such a thick coat would have stopped bodkin arrows but not the cutting force of broadhead arrows.) Against "high quality riveted [[mail (armour)|maille]]", the needle bodkin and curved broadhead penetrated {{cvt|2.8|in|mm}}. Against a [[coat of plates]], the needle bodkin achieved {{cvt|0.3|in|mm}} penetration. The curved broadhead did not penetrate but caused 0.3&nbsp;in of deformation of the metal. Results against [[plate armour]] of "minimum thickness" ({{cvt|1.2|mm|in|order=flip}}) were similar to the coat of plates, in that the needle bodkin penetrated to a shallow depth, the other arrows not at all. In Bane's view, the plate armour would have kept out all the arrows if thicker or worn with more padding.

Other modern tests described by Bane include those by Williams (which concluded that longbows could ''not'' penetrate mail, but in Bane's view did not use a realistic arrow tip), [[Robert Hardy]]'s tests (which achieved broadly similar results to Bane), and a ''Primitive Archer'' test which demonstrated that a longbow '''could''' penetrate a plate armour breastplate. However, the ''Primitive Archer'' test used a {{convert|160|lbf|abbr=on}} longbow at very short range, generating 160 joules (vs. 73 for Bane and 80 for Williams), so probably not representative of battles of the time.

Tests conducted by Mark Stretton{{sfn|Soar|Gibbs|Jury|Stretton|2010|pages=127–151<!-- this page range needs breaking down to march the paragraphs -->}} examined the effects of heavier war shafts (as opposed to lighter hunting or distance-shooting 'flight arrows'). The quarrel-like {{cvt|102|g|oz|adj=on|order=flip}} arrow from a yew 'self bow' (with a draw weight of {{cvt|144|lbf|N}} at {{cvt|32|in|cm}}) while travelling at {{cvt|47.23|m/s|ft/s}} yielded 113.76&nbsp;joules, more [[Kinetic energy penetrator|kinetic energy]] than the lighter broad-heads while achieving 90% of the range. The short, heavy [[Quarrel (projectile)|quarrel]]-form bodkin could penetrate a replica [[brigandine]] at up to 40° from perpendicular.{{sfn|Soar|Gibbs|Jury|Stretton|2010|pages=127–151<!-- this page range needs breaking down to march the paragraphs -->}}

In 2011, [[Mike Loades]] conducted an experiment in which short bodkin arrows were shot at a range of {{convert|10|yd|m|abbr=on}} by bows of {{convert|140|lbf|abbr=on}} – powerful bows at less than normal battlefield range. The target was covered in a riveted mail over a fabric armour of deerskin over 24 linen layers. While most arrows went through the mail layer, none fully penetrated the textile armour.{{sfn|Loades|2013|pp=72–73}}

Other research has also concluded that later medieval armour, such as that of the Italian city-state mercenary companies, was effective at stopping contemporary arrows.{{sfn|Kaiser|2003}}

Computer analysis by Warsaw University of Technology in 2017 has estimated that heavy [[bodkin point]] arrows could penetrate typical [[plate armour]] of the time at up to {{convert|225|m|ft|order=flip}}. However, the depth of penetration would be slight at that range, a mere {{cvt|14|mm|in|order=flip}} on average; penetration increased as the range closed or against armour lesser than the best quality available at the time, but stopped at {{cvt|24|mm|in|order=flip}}, the highest penetration depth estimated at {{cvt|25|m|ft|order=flip}} range, it was unlikely to be deadly.{{sfn|Magier|Nowak|Tomasz|Zochowski|2017|pp=73, 77, 81, 84}}

In August 2019, the Blacksmith [[YouTube]] channel 'Tod's Workshop', together with historian Dr [[Tobias Capwell]] (curator at the [[Wallace collection]]), Joe Gibbs (archer), Will Sherman (fletcher) and Kevin Legg (armourer) ran a practical test using as close a recreation of 15th century plate armour (made with materials and techniques fitting to the time period) over a chainmail and gambeson against a {{cvt|160|lbf|N|adj=on}} longbow. They shot a variety of arrows at the target and the results showed that the arrows shot by a 160&nbsp;lb longbow were unable to penetrate the front of the armour at any range, but the arrow that struck below the harness went right through the underlying protection.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBxdTkddHaE|title = ARROWS vs ARMOUR – Medieval Myth Busting|website = [[YouTube]]| date=29 August 2019 }}</ref>