Got into a discussion the other day about the longbow and the smooth bore rifles. To this day, I cant figure out why the heck the Brits switched from the longbow to the smooth bores when they had way more firepower, and most likely better accuracy, with the longbow. I.E at Crecy, they figured the longbowmen fired in excess of 90,000 arrows a minute at the French.
I wonder if during WW1, at certain areas where the lines were close if they would have used longbows if they couldnt have sent those arrows into the German trenches what the result would have been. Keep in mind that a rifle shoots horizontal while the longbow arrows would have come down on them.
“...I cant figure out why the heck the Brits switched from the longbow to the smooth bores...”
My understanding is that the long bows used in war required strength and practice to use effectively. They have a heavier draw weight than those used for hunting. They required time to learn to use well and they started the archers out young. On the other hand, any previously untrained person who could lift one could be taught to load and aim a smooth bore in short order.
Takes a lot less training to use a gun than a bow.
“...if they would have used longbows if they could have sent those arrows into the German trenches what the results would have been.”
The British must have surely thought about the longbow or any weapon that could break the bloody stalemate of trench warfare.
The effectiveness of the English longbow at Crecy & Agincourt depended on massed volleying and archers’ ability to loose a fifth shaft while the first was still in the air.
The German response to a storm of incoming longbow arrows (which were heavy & meant to pierce armor) would have been from another indirect fire weapon: the trench mortar. German mortars were without peer both in size & destructive power.
But, your interesting question was about the transition from longbows to firearms. Archers were deadly at range, but other soldiers such as dragoons & infantry had to actually close with the enemy with pikes & swords. Archers took up to ten years to acquire their skill; their lives were precious on the battlefield.
Masses of footsoldiers armed with muskets & bayonets were a far more mobile force. Note that earlier generations of soldiery wore helmets & chain mail armor. These were made moot by the advent of gunpowder.
Just my thoughts. Come to think of it, the crossbow was used by commandos. Yanks used shotguns in the trenches. What’s past is prologue.
To this day, I cant figure out why the heck the Brits switched from the longbow to the smooth bores
Those must've been water-cooled longbowmen. /s