Origin of Lampasse

Military units using various decorations is not news. Most were either designed to shock their opponents or add to the decorative pomp of the dress uniform.
There is a lot of controversy why it was. I think it was for aerodynamics. The rider flew up, so horse easie to run
 
of course, British peasants could not be cowboys, they could barely feed themselves

And? What does it matter? It has no relevance to this topic.

Once again you try to derail your own thread in order to not appear an idiot. Sorry, but it is too late.
 
There is a lot of controversy why it was. I think it was for aerodynamics. The rider flew up, so horse easie to run

There is no way those wings provided enough life, even moving into the wind, to reduce the rider's weight enough to help the horse run faster. If anything the drag of the wings against the wind made it harder for the horse.
 
There is no way those wings provided enough life, even moving into the wind, to reduce the rider's weight enough to help the horse run faster. If anything the drag of the wings against the wind made it harder for the horse.
Airplanes don't fly either, air resistance gets in the way lol
 
Probably legends of angels from here

The legends of angels preceded any of these by centuries. The first stories of angels appeared in the Euphrates valley between 4,000 and 2,500 BCE.

The Winged Hussars started in 1503. So the legends of angels was already between 1,700 and 1,900 years old.
 
What does it matter?
A horse is an expensive pleasure even now. Only a millionaire can afford a good war horse. It is especially difficult for a beggar to buy and feed a horse when there is no pasture and grain.
 
Airplanes don't fly either, air resistance gets in the way lol

Don't be daft. Airplanes have significantly more wing surface for the size of the body, and more power.

If the wind on the wings of the Hussars would lift the man in the saddle, the rider would be unable to stay in the saddle, especially with any shift in the wind. And the idea that a line of feathers on a wooden frame strapped to their backs would lift them up is ridiculous.
 
A horse is an expensive pleasure even now. Only a millionaire can afford a good war horse. It is especially difficult for a beggar to buy and feed a horse when there is no pasture and grain.

It is not just millionaires that can afford a good war horse. Of course, it depends on the type of warfare they will be involved in. Typical cavalry used saddle horses. Perhaps when the Heavy Horse Cavalry was in use they were too expensive for common men. But part of that would have been the armor the horses wore.

And the fact that you keep referring back to peasants (or beggars), when it has no bearing on the topic, shows you are getting desperate.
 
indean_horse108-1000x-ecb.jpg
 
Your objections are pathetic, they are not worth considering.
 
Your objections are pathetic, they are not worth considering.

Oh? So you have no real argument against what I have said, so you condemn them without cause. Pitiful.

The expansive feathered costumes of the Native Americans had no use in battle, other than to identify the chief.
 
An objection to each individual argument is always weaker than a systematic confirmation by a multitude of arguments. Indeed, not only a duck quacks, not only a duck has duck legs, not only a duck walks like a duck, but if something walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, has duck legs, then it is most likely a duck.
 
There is a lot of controversy why it was. I think it was for aerodynamics. The rider flew up, so horse easie to run
.

Attempting to suggest that warriors wore wings and feathers for aerodynamics and lift ...
Would be like trying to suggest modern warriors may wear this as tactical body armor ... :auiqs.jpg:



1660737415665.png


.
 

Forum List

Back
Top