Does leather over plate actually insulate the wearer from cold?

File: shirts-tunics_templar-tunic_446.jpg (43KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 500x500px

>>34712083
no they would wear a tunic over it as a form of identification.

And under pat they'd wear a gambeson to soften the blow.

>>34712083
They used to cover plate with velvet for aesthetic reasons. I don't know about leather, but it seems reasonable. It would make more sense to just wear a coat, that way you can take it off when needed. What's this scene about?

I was under the impression it was to prevent the wearer from accidentally freezing to his armor.

>>34712083
The multiple layered gambeson underneat should be fine. Even in the cold you're probably more liable to overheat than anything, especially if you do any amount of work. Fiction in general tends to overestimate that amount of time anyone actually wants to loiter around in armor.

>>34712120
>>34712113
>>34712112
I think its put outside the armor here

>>34712083
Historical validity aside
>Does leather over plate actually insulate the wearer from cold?
No shit, of course it does. Are you retarded?

Leather doesn't even protect you from the cold in the first place. It protects you from the wind and the rain. Boiled leather gets hard and can soften a blow or reduce a cut. Brigantine armor is leather into which plates or rings of iron has been sown for further strength. But the only way to get a heat benefit from leather is to keep a warm garment inside its shielding effect.

>>34712130
>>34712120 here I'm saying that the existing armor (which inherently includes a gambeson under layer if they aren't retarded) should be more than sufficient. I realize that it's over the armor here and I'm saying that's unnecessary. And was not commonly done as far as I know.

wearing metal armor in frozen conditions is deadly
no matter what you put on over or under it
the plates would just pull all the heat out of your
body and leave you in hypothermia within hours

>>34712190
only a Sith deals in absolutes

>>34712083
I took it to mean the leather would go UNDER the steel, to keep it from sucking all the heat out through the wearer's linen underclothes.

What they should be doing is putting tiny shards of dragnglass inside all the plates, so that if and when you go down you can't be raised to fight against your former comrades.

File: another happy landing.jpg (181KB, 1457x623px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 1457x623px

>>34712207
Well hello there

Literally only brought up to show LE STRONK WOMYN meme, because clearly this young royal cunt who's never touched armor in her life knows better than older experienced blacksmiths who've been doing this for decades.

>>34712190
This is retarded and not how heat transfer or insulation works at all.

File: 1474728290942.png (252KB, 511x428px) Image search: [Google]

252KB, 511x428px

>a tv show that is just drama and dicks
>surprised when they just make up some bullshit
C'mon /k/...

>>34712487
don't forget the incestuous jew family

File: 1411985666861.jpg (98KB, 500x574px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 500x574px

>>34712083
why wouldnt the leather go UNDER the plate?

>>34712083
The only real cause I could see would be to cover metal in freezing conditions so that bare skin wouldn't stick to it.

Just to make a counterpoint. In theory you could put leather outside the metal armor to keep it from rusting, which would be neat. This is pointless for two reasons: leather isn't actually waterproof, it just keeps the dampness off a bit. More importantly, metal body armor never was a soldier thing but owned by filthy rich aristos playing soldier. Just like a rich guy with a luxury car, he'd never dream of cleaning or maintaining or repairing it himself. That's what servants are for.

>>34712190
No, a good gambeson should keep you warm. It's only really a problem if your skin is right up against the steel.

>>34712528
They wear it above the plate

>>34712642
>metal body armor never was a soldier thing
>armor

Well, I suppose I shouldn't be too surprised you don't know anything.

>>34712083
>listening to women

>>34713078

Oh noes! Lingustics Policeman is here! Everyones take cover unt brung forth yer grammaristicks!

>>34712642
Simply false. Men-at-arms were all well-armored. Often as armored as knights.

Most knights weren't super-rich nobility either.

>>34713322
Keep in mind that many men-at-arms only had armor because of a wealthy patron that paid for all their shit.

Also, by the time full plate armor came around men-at-arms and knights often didn't have the same level of armor.

>>34713344
Double dubs died for this post. I understand where you're confusing your ramblings for intelligence, it is common knowledge that the average foot soldier was stuck with chain mail and other shit like that. But, but! Plate armor was common place enough that I would dare say a quarter of the combatants on the field at any time could be seen sporting it. And men at arms and knights would absolutely be the main people wearing it

>>34712145
autism

>>34713381

You really have no idea whatsoever of what you are talking about, do you. What kind of people do you imagine manned a 10.000 man strong army in medieval times?

>>34712083
Maybe just cold winds, Leather is best to fight off wind.

>>34713381
With its incredible labor intensiveness chain wasn't magically the poor man's armor, it could rival plate cost for cost. A foot soldier would likely have a helmet and chestpiece though (plate, brigandine, jack, hauberk)

>>34713455
What kind do you imagine? There were 10,000 french knights and men-at-arms at agincourt who I can assure you were very well armored. That was late medieval warfare. Go back to the early medieval period and plate armor straight up doesn't exist. This is why "medieval" is a shit, obfuscative word.

File: 1493576336390.jpg (1MB, 2870x2138px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2870x2138px

>>34712083
Why is it that in every thread like this people don't understand that there is different periods of time and also different nations that use different armor.

There is no armor set like in some RPG. Generalizing by an extreme amount most of the military forces in Europe, through the Dark Ages into The High Middle Ages, only had a very few amount of conscripts and they enlisted commoners who have to produce whatever armor and weaponry they had available.

>>34712083
covering steel with leather would only make it heavier. it's bullshit. you wear heavily padded jackets and pants under metal armor most likely stuffed with wool in cold weather.

>>34712145
no, the only thing it could be used for is to reduce clank and shiny.

basically you can make plate wearers a tiny bit more stealthy if that is your goal, but usually sneaky dudes just didn't wear plate. it still made your movements awkward in climbing and whatnot, you can fight just fine in plate armor that is what it was made for especially if you trained in it, but generally it was a pain in the ass to run an obstacle curse in it.

>>34712083
Think about cold frosty metal. That would suck to touch, inside or out. It would also reduce glare and protect the metal a bit.

>>34712190
you can throw pelts on the armor hair out and it was actually done. it reduces the windchill.

insulation is important, the metal can't pull out heat any more from your body than the wind would. as the wind pulls the same heat out of the armor it just a convictive medium.

>>34712190
that's why I don't drive a car in the winter, I don't want it pulling all the heat out of me

>>34712083
The leather is there to catch the enemies blade so that it doesn't slide across your armor and hit your neck or shoulder

>>34714622
No.

>>34713766
Have you ever slept in a car in the dead of winter? It is fucking atrocious and even with a thick blanket around you it can be unbearably cold. Other guy might be a retard but cars are very poorly insulated.

>>34715457
Have you ever slept in the ground in the dead of winter?

>>34715493
Yes.

>>34712900
not even they guy you responded to but you are literally retarded

File: Brigandine 16th poss italy.jpg (224KB, 325x468px) Image search: [Google]

224KB, 325x468px

>>34712146
>Brigantine armor is leather into which plates or rings of iron has been sown for further strength

Brigandine usually has an outer shell made of fabric, not leather. The metal bits that provide the protection are almost universally plates, though I do know of one brigandine which partially used mail instead.

The use of large rings, "ring mail", is pure fantasy folly. People saw the Bayeux tapestry and decided to be strictly "literal" in interpreting it, with little care for it being impossible to accurately portray mail in that medium.

>>34713565
>and they enlisted commoners who have to produce whatever armor and weaponry they had available

While village blacksmiths may be called upon to create basic, crude spears, war-scythes, and similar in times of need most arms and armour you'd see in an army would have been the work of specialised craftsmen. Usually not even a specialised sword maker working on his own, but a line of them. Sword blades were made in one shop (with apprentices and journeymen working almost in assembly line), and then those would be sold in bulk to cutlers, who'd assemble complete swords, source leatherwork form a leatherworker, etc.

By the late middle ages a number of large manufacturing centres sold arms and armour by the army-load to all of Europe.

>>34712083
Is it because the steel might get cold and crack?
The winters in the books are pretty cold due to the fact that theyre in part magic

>>34715619
Or maybe to protect against blunt weapons?
I read in a book metal armor was better against stabs and slashes and leather could protect against blunt strikes to the body

>>34715619
It won't take long for the leather and plate both to cool. You'll need steel that isn't cold-short, no way around it.

>>34715637
Hard plates, especially when back by a bit of padding, are much better against blunt impacts that a thin layer of leather. Constructions workers wear hard hats to survive falling bricks, not knitted caps.

>>34713285
no, you're being a faggot. armor is for soldiers or people who expect to be in danger.

>le unarmoured medieval peasant army

Fuck off you ill-informed pricks
The English armies in the Hundred Years War consisted of archers and men-at-arms
The only difference between the standard MAA and knight is pay and probably some knights had more adornments on their armour.

Medieval kingdoms weren't fucking poor, they could afford to use well-equipped men, and people without equipment weren't even worth taking with and feeding on a campaign.

File: bxeAwbN.png (63KB, 625x626px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 625x626px

>>34713622

>>34715593
Don't forget the coat of plates which predates the brigandine and a jack of plates which was a gambeson that had metal plates sewn into it.

File: 1487356055990.jpg (73KB, 583x509px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 583x509px

>>34715593
>THAT NEVER HAPPUNED!!!!
>NOW LET ME GO ON A DIATRIBE ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED IN ONE CITY DURING ONE DECADE AND ASSUME THAT'S THE STANDARD FOR LITERALLY 2,000 YEARS OF HISTORY FOR OUR PLANET
Where would we be without dunning-kruger assholes talking about "historically-accurate" armor on the internet? Every single one of you is a fucking dumbass that thinks he's a genius because he learned about how ONE historian imagined literally one fucking battle.

>>34715816
... The fuck did he say that triggered you this badly? Is it the bit about ring mail?

Ask anyone who knows dick about dick, dude. Ring mail is not real. Why the fuck would it be? It's just chain mail but scaled up to such a size that any sword or spear thrust, arrow, sling bullet, any weapon with a small cross section offending you will sail right through. The aketon underneath would actually protect you more than the metal rings.

>>34715816
PS if it was the bit about unarmored peasants, you're still retarded. There's names for armies of unarmored peasants: revolt, uprising, riot. They were easily and thoroughly smashed in any society that wasn't completely broken already.

>>34712083
Leather is right shit for the cold. Blocks wind but has very little r- value. Wool would have made a lot more sense.

>>34716083
Even then, there was a mass grave from a peasant uprising found and the peasants were equipped with out dated armor, so even then they weren't completely unarmored.