… he mentions the fact that medieval archers could shoot their arrows the length of 2 football fields (i.e. 200 yards) and manage to wound the enemy. Now, I like Crichton’s books because he always mixes a bit of fact with fiction, but I think I might need some clarification of this. First of all, the bow must have a terrific draw weight for the arrows to fly that far. Secondly, wouldn’t the necessary elevation cut down on speed, thereby lessening penetration capability?
He also writes that medieval archers were able to nock and loose their arrows in 3 seconds. That’s 20 arrows a minute. I realize they were probably not aiming at anyone, but damn!
It would take a great deal of draw weight for a bow to propell an arrow 200 yards, but it’s not impossible. Back in the medieval times, everyone lined up, on opposite sides of the field, and stood there before rushing into melee combat. The archers only had to worry about range, not accuracy. A bunch of archers would all let loose arrows at once. If 50% of them hit their target, that’s a successful attack. And, if they are 200 yards apart, the archers can get about 3-6 attacks in the amount of time Michael Johnson could run that, if the 3 second time is correct. I’m sure that not every archer is going to be that fast for every shot, but if they were really slow, I’d doubt they’d be taken to battle.
As for your question regarding the elevation detracting from penetration force, this is nearly negligible. The amount of energy needed to raise the arrow to elevation is returned to the arrow by gravity when it falls. There is a little force that is lessened by air friction, but this is minute compared to the total force. Also, with the design of the tips, you don’t need a lot of force to pierce fleshy parts of the body, or chinks in chain mail armor, or leather armor. And the flights on the shaft of the arrow help keep the arrow flying in a smooth path (ie. with the tip in the front).