Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-16-2016, 05:24 AM   #121
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
Default Re: Swords and plate

Quote:
Originally Posted by (E) View Post
I should have made myself a bit more clear, I have used a "slasher" (scrub clearing implement akin to a very heavy machete on an axe handle) to cut sheet metal* (albeit predominantly various gauges of corrugated iron) Like you said with the USSR approach it's not pretty but it is fast.

*also used a spade. Demolition experience plus used the same technique when cutting large amounts of corrugated iron while building flood gates.
On a side note it is possible to get a reasonably tidy finish if you start the cut with a slasher/axe/spade and then tear the metal with a guide pressed tightly in place

Edit
Slasher though the ones I have used have a smaller "beak" about 1/4 the size.

Edit 2
An Irish single edged slasher to be exact
OK got it (I did wonder when you said slasher, and yeah that's a pretty modern day bill hook!),

One question did you cut into the edge of the corrugated iron and work you way along the cut, or did you swing into the 'flat' plane of the metal?


But yes to answer your question I'm guessing the hook will help stop the edge escaping your swing under the force of the blow. (and the hook point will also help any piecing action).
Tomsdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2016, 05:41 AM   #122
(E)
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: New Zealand.
Default Re: Swords and plate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomsdad View Post
Snip
One question did you cut into the edge of the corrugated iron and work you way along the cut, or did you swing into the 'flat' plane of the metal?
Snip
Both, But I found it easier/tidier to start the cut in the 'flat' of the metal as hitting the edge of the sheet was more likely to make it crumple but remain intact.
__________________
Waiting for inspiration to strike......
(E) is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2016, 05:52 AM   #123
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
Default Re: Swords and plate

Quote:
Originally Posted by (E) View Post
Both, But I found it easier/tidier to start the cut in the 'flat' of the metal as hitting the edge of the sheet was more likely to make it crumple but remain intact.
Cool cheers, hmm if it's crumpling what kind of gauge are we talking here.

I mean I know you said it was corrugated iron so I know we're not talking about full strength or hardened steel or anything, but I'd be interested if you can remember

Cheers

TD
Tomsdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2016, 06:09 AM   #124
(E)
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: New Zealand.
Default Re: Swords and plate

The heaviest I would have cut was also the oldest, according to a renovation website the standard gauge for that was between 2 and 3 millimeters, although that was mainly rust.

Most of it would have been thinner at .45mm or .609mm, 26 and 24 gauge, 0.018" and 0.024".
__________________
Waiting for inspiration to strike......
(E) is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2016, 06:33 AM   #125
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
Default Re: Swords and plate

Quote:
Originally Posted by (E) View Post
The heaviest I would have cut was also the oldest, according to a renovation website the standard gauge for that was between 2 and 3 millimeters, although that was mainly rust.

Most of it would have been thinner at .45mm or .609mm, 26 and 24 gauge, 0.018" and 0.024".
Cool, cheers for digging into it

TD

Last edited by Tomsdad; 07-17-2016 at 02:38 AM.
Tomsdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2016, 07:09 AM   #126
safisher
Gunnery Sergeant,
 Imperial Marines
Coauthor,
 GURPS High-Tech
 
safisher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Default Re: Swords and plate

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanHoward View Post
The bodies recovered at Towton were killed afterwards, not during the fighting.
The quote I gave upthread is from a new book by Brill, Battle Trauma in Medieval Warfare: Wounds, Weapons, and Armor, by Robert C. Woosnam-Savage and Kelly DeVries. They seem to think the wounds may have been caused by those fleeing cavalry. Fact is, we don't know.

Quote:
Either torso armour was invulnerable to these weapons or nobody ever aimed at the torso.
Or the torso could not be aimed at. Given a shield line, or use of the shield, overhead swing attacks to the head, neck, and arms would be more common than torso wounds. But as I said, only very general conclusions can be taken from archaeological finds since we know so little about their actual death.

But saying "torso armour was invulnerable to these weapons" is really broad and sweeping, and certainly not a consensus view.

"Never in military history have armies been so well (and so effectively) armored. The catalogue of wounds above shows how protective armor was in the Middle Ages; wounds to the limbs and head were most common but could be survived, while those to the head were, of course, the fatal ones. Only those killed in what are clearly recorded as massacres of unarmored individuals, as at Corinth, or possibly massacres, as at Ridgeway Hill show wounds to the torso. Experiments carried out by the Royal Armouries in England and elsewhere have confirmed how difficult it was to penetrate a moving target covered by mail or plate armor" then they go on and say "men were swinging, thrusting, or shooting sharp-edged, blunt-edged or projectile weapons at each other, wounding their opponents while, simultaneously, hoping their own skills and armor might keep them from being wounded themselves."

I'm not claiming armor was not protective. It's very purpose was to stop wounds. I am very dubious of the idea, as should any scholar be, of armor which was described as "invulnerable."
__________________
Buy my stuff on E23. Fav Blogs: Doug Cole here , C.R. Rice's here, & Hans Christian Vortisch here.
safisher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2016, 07:14 AM   #127
safisher
Gunnery Sergeant,
 Imperial Marines
Coauthor,
 GURPS High-Tech
 
safisher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Default Re: Swords and plate

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanHoward View Post
If we are going to examine sources for weapons penetrating armour then we need to limit ourselves to fight manuals and eye witness accounts. Not assumptions made by historians such as Oakeshott and Oman.
That's just a subjective determination which masks a confirmation bias. Given your own record of blatant overstatement of facts and misuse of sources, you hardly have any room to criticize others. And yet again, I see how the "acceptable" evidence has drifted even further. We now must rely solely on original language sources from eyewitnesses. This is rich, indeed.
__________________
Buy my stuff on E23. Fav Blogs: Doug Cole here , C.R. Rice's here, & Hans Christian Vortisch here.
safisher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2016, 07:49 AM   #128
DanHoward
 
DanHoward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
Default Re: Swords and plate

Quote:
Originally Posted by safisher View Post
That's just a subjective determination which masks a confirmation bias. Given your own record of blatant overstatement of facts and misuse of sources, you hardly have any room to criticize others. And yet again, I see how the "acceptable" evidence has drifted even further. We now must rely solely on original language sources from eyewitnesses. This is rich, indeed.
The very first thing we learn in history is to study primary sources whenever possible. Secondary sources take all the biases of primary sources and add their own biases.

Edit: some lesser known primary sources are in this thread.
http://myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic....er=asc&start=0
__________________
Compact Castles gives the gamer an instant portfolio of genuine, real-world castle floorplans to use in any historical, low-tech, or fantasy game setting.

Last edited by DanHoward; 07-16-2016 at 08:10 AM.
DanHoward is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2016, 09:21 AM   #129
safisher
Gunnery Sergeant,
 Imperial Marines
Coauthor,
 GURPS High-Tech
 
safisher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Default Re: Swords and plate

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanHoward View Post
The very first thing we learn in history is to study primary sources whenever possible. Secondary sources take all the biases of primary sources and add their own biases.
Primary sources are great, assuming you can translate them yourself. Even if you can you will deal with multiple approaches to translation of those texts. Textual criticism is a robust field. And this assumes you have access to the actual document, and not a copy which can include errors. But that isn't what's being done here. What's being done is excluding whole categories of historical work for the purposes of concealing a poorly designed historiographical argument predicated on cherry picking evidence. It's a disturbing pattern, Dan, and you should know better by now.
__________________
Buy my stuff on E23. Fav Blogs: Doug Cole here , C.R. Rice's here, & Hans Christian Vortisch here.
safisher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-17-2016, 02:42 AM   #130
Tomsdad
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brighton
Default Re: Swords and plate

Quote:
Originally Posted by (E) View Post
The heaviest I would have cut was also the oldest, according to a renovation website the standard gauge for that was between 2 and 3 millimeters, although that was mainly rust.

Most of it would have been thinner at .45mm or .609mm, 26 and 24 gauge, 0.018" and 0.024".
I forget to put that into the terms being discussed earlier. If we give the corrugated equivalent DR as RHA* (DR70/inch) 0.018" and 0.024" comes out at DR1 and DR2 when rounded**. Which is the lower end of the scale discussed and would be beaten by swung cutting attacks even with the various tweaks mentioned. And obviously due to the construction you don't have to worry about anything like the targeting chinks rule to be hitting that DR.


Sorry I originally had this as an edit of yesterday's post, but I have a bad habit of going back and adding stuff to older posts, and this is really the meaningful bit in terms of what we were discussing. So I thought it best to actually do a new post rather than add it on to something written yesterday!


*which is being possibly generous of course.

**its 1.26 and 1.68 respectively

Last edited by Tomsdad; 07-17-2016 at 07:07 AM.
Tomsdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
armor, hema

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.