That's why they focused o nAgincurt, the two sides' strength is (moderately well) agreed upon--Henry having 5-6000 archers facing 1200-3000 French archers (but, many of those may have been in the baggage, in reserve).Most medieval combat wasn't done by armored knights at all
The trick to drawing the heavy bows, as John puts it, is putting your whole body into the bow. As in not just pulling back the string. It's an art/skill only mastered with much practice.140 pound draw!!
My wimpy 50 pound canvas-backed red oak bow is about all that I can handle and hit a target consistently!
I could probably go 75 pounds just volley firing, but 140 pounds!!!
Maybe the archers concentrated on head (eye openings) and seam shots. One would be an immediate kill shot, and the other would disabling through joint damage or internal injuries.
The arrow speeds in the video were about half what a modern crossbow can generate. I wonder what period crossbows were capable of, and did those actually penetrate equivalent armor?
Mine is the right shoulder...-Maybe if my left shoulder were in better shape... .
Remember as well that almost any wound in those days might not be survivable and that the armor they wore in some cases was so heavy that a knight had to be winched up onto the horse (and no matter what movies show - a knight's war horse had a lot more in common with a Clydesdale than some perfect looking Arabian....). If you could get a knight down he was in big trouble...
That's it in a nutshell. Knights were tanks.Armored knights were like armor in modern armies.