Quote:
Originally Posted by DouglasCole
Note that Shawn frequently - and in this case, I think - links to these mocking them as authoritative, not asserting them. "I sawz it on the YouTube!" being not exactly the rigorous standard he's used to as a PhD in history.
I took this as linked almost entirely tongue in cheek, but I could be mistaken.
|
I agree I think it was, but interesting that the chap with his recreation halberd while capable of piercing the car bonnet pretty well with a thrust was pretty bad as cutting through it with a swing. Demonstrating the basic premise that cutting through metal with a hand held swung weapon is pretty much a non starter, and certainly sub optimal compared to other attacks.
Now of course no one is going to try and extrapolate precise results against real armour from that video, but come on if you can't get through a car bonnet* what does that say for cutting through actual armour.
It's a bit like if I came up with a great new cartridge and made great claim's for it ability to pierce modern body armour. But if when messing about shooting tin cans with it is only just gets though one, no one's going to expend much time and effort assessing how well it does against modern body armour.
*now if we theoretically argue the halberd used was as proportionally sub par compared to historical halberds as the car bonnet was to historical plate armour well then OK, but I see no evidence to support that rather tortuous justification (leaving aside that if that was the case it would still have not got past any underlying arming garment).