An arrow flying at an angle to the airflow suffers far more drag
12 studies
The drag coefficient with a laminar and with a turbulent air layer, study by study
drag coefficient
The numbers in the figure
| Study or group | Value (drag coefficient) | Interval | n | Stance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ortiz 2018, laminar layer | 1.5 | for | ||
| Ortiz 2018, turbulent layer | 2.69 | for | ||
| Shen 2025, laminar layer | 1.63 | for | ||
| Shen 2025, turbulent layer | 3.23 | for | ||
| Miyazaki 2017, laminar layer | 1.6 | for | ||
| Miyazaki 2017, turbulent layer | ≈ 3.1 | for | ||
| Ortiz 2020, laminar layer | ≈ 1.35 | for | ||
| Ortiz 2020, turbulent layer | ≈ 2.45 | for | ||
| Matsumoto 2016, laminar layer | ≈ 1.5 | for | ||
| Matsumoto 2016, turbulent layer | ≈ 2.6 | for | ||
| Meyer 2015, compound bow | 1.94 | ± 0.14 (± as reported by the study) | context |
The summary today
The threshold is around half a degree: as long as the arrow stays aligned with the airflow, the layer of air running along it stays laminar and the drag coefficient is about 1.5; as soon as it passes four to six tenths of a degree the layer turns turbulent and the coefficient rises to about 2.6, that is nearly double. The same jump has been measured in the tunnel with the angle imposed, where in 2017 three quarters of a degree is enough to take the coefficient from about 1.6 to about 3.1, and in free flight with a compressed-air launcher, including with an inertial sensor inside the shaft, where the deceleration goes from 0.65 to 0.30 G as the angle of attack falls below three tenths of a degree. In the turbulent regime the drag reaches 80 per cent of the arrow's weight, and two calculations, one from the same group and one from outside it but calibrated on its data, recover the same jump. There are two limits worth knowing. The first is that the jump only exists while the flow is still laminar: if it is already turbulent, drag stays nearly the same as the angle changes. The second comes from 2022 and cuts the angle down to size: between a tapered point at 0.46 and 0.51 degrees and a bulge point at 0.44, it was the point shape that decided the flow regime, not the angle. What remains is that nobody has measured how often an arrow shot by an archer actually crosses that threshold, or how far that crossing moves the point of impact over a real end.
Also phrased as: "an arrow flying dirty"; "a tilted arrow slows down"; "angle of attack of the arrow"; "what an untidy flight costs"; "boundary layer along the shaft"
In practice
Archers talk about an arrow flying clean and an arrow fishtailing, and equipment is tuned so that the arrow leaves aligned, on the assumption that a dirty flight costs distance and points.
Evidence
-
2011
For Equipment tests Published later
A crossbow bolt with three point shapes, flight tests with a compressed-air launcher and two high-speed cameras plus the magnetic suspension tunnel: with the ogival point near the critical speed (Reynolds between 0.50 and 0.77 times 10 to the sixth), about one degree of tilt is enough to raise the drag coefficient from about 1.0 to about 1.7. The jump only exists, though, while the air layer is still laminar: with the blunt point, already in the turbulent regime, the coefficient stays around 1.8 across the whole range of incidence. It is the first figure on the threshold and, at once, the first limit of the claim.
Aerodynamic properties of an arrow: Influence of point shape on the boundary layer transition · Keita Mukaiyama, Kazuhiko Suzuki, Takeshi Miyazaki, Hideo Sawada
-
2011
For Equipment tests Published later
Competition X10 and A/C/E arrows in JAXA's 60 cm magnetic suspension tunnel, incidence between minus three and a half and plus three degrees: for both arrows the shift of the air layer from laminar to turbulent already shows at about half a degree of incidence. It is the first measurement of the threshold on archery arrows.
A10 Aerodynamic Properties of an Archery Arrow : JAXA's 60cm MSBS Experiments · Yuta Komori, Keita Mukaiyama, Takeshi Miyazaki, Hiroki Sugiura
-
2012
For Equipment tests Published later
An A/C/E arrow in the wind tunnel at a Reynolds number of 1.0 times 10 to the fourth: the drag coefficient is about 1.5 while the angle of attack stays below six tenths of a degree and jumps above about one degree, as the air layer turns turbulent.
Aerodynamic properties of an archery arrow · Takeshi Miyazaki, Keita Mukaiyama, Yuta Komori, Kyouhei Okawa, Satoshi Taguchi, Hiroki Sugiura
-
2012
For Equipment tests Published later
Easton A/C/E arrows in the magnetic suspension tunnel with the angle imposed between minus three and plus three degrees, alongside free-flight tests with an air launcher, a robot and an archer: at a Reynolds number of 1.0 times 10 to the fourth the drag coefficient rises sharply once the incidence passes about six tenths of a degree, and the threshold does not depend on point shape. The authors put it down to the non-symmetric disturbances the tilt introduces, which bring the transition forward.
117 Aerodynamic Properties of an Archery Arrow : Free Flight Experiments and JAXA's 60cm MSBS Experiments · Kyohei Okawa, Yuta Komori, Takeshi Miyazaki, Hiroki Sugiura
-
2013
For Equipment tests Published later
An Easton A/C/E arrow in the wind tunnel with two kinds of vane: with Spin Wings the air layer turns turbulent beyond about six tenths of a degree of angle of attack, with Gas Pro vanes at a slightly larger angle. The threshold turns up again with the same arrows as the earlier work, from the same group.
Free Flight and Wind Tunnel Measurements of the Drag Exerted on an Archery Arrow · K. Okawa, Y. Komori, T. Miyazaki, S. Taguchi, H. Sugiura
-
2014
Context Equipment tests Published later
Four commercial arrows in a water tunnel at 0.1 metres per second, with Reynolds numbers between 700 and 980, far below those of flight: the flow stays attached at the point between minus six and plus six degrees of tilt and separates from nine degrees upwards. It concerns flow separation at very low speed, not the shift of the air layer to turbulent nor drag, and it is published in a questionable venue.
Experimental Hydro- and Aerodynamics Research on Arrow Questionable venue · Xiao An Long
-
2015
For Equipment tests Published later
A/C/E arrows, magnetic suspension tunnel, free flight with an air launcher and numerical calculation: at a Reynolds number of 1.1 times 10 to the fourth the transition required an incidence above six tenths of a degree, while at 1.77 times 10 to the fourth the calculation shows it already at a maximum incidence of about 0.45 degrees, so the faster the arrow the less tilt it takes. Lift and pitching moment grow in proportion to the incidence and their slopes barely depend on speed. The work adds a point that concerns the archer: with the right initial spin the arrow flies at practically no incidence and keeps the air layer laminar, and a departure of about 0.2 radians per second from that value takes the maximum incidence above 0.45 degrees. The same programme of tests is also published in the 2016 work.
The relation between the boundary layer transition and the attitude of archery arrow · T. Matsumoto, R. Ando, J. Ortiz, T. Miyazaki, S. Taguchi
-
2015
Context Equipment tests Published later
A carbon arrow shot from a shooting machine, 25 shots at seven distances between 27.4 and 82.3 m: from the decay of speed comes a drag coefficient of 1.94 with an uncertainty of 0.14, at a Reynolds number of about 35,000, that is the turbulent-regime value. It does not measure the tilt, but it says that a real arrow, launched by a machine, travels in the high-drag regime.
Applications of Physics to Archery · H. O. Meyer
-
2016
For Equipment tests Published later
A/C/E arrows with Spin Wing vanes in flight, Reynolds number between 1.3 and 1.8 times 10 to the fourth: the drag coefficients fall into two groups, about 1.5 with a laminar air layer and about 2.6 with a turbulent one, that is drag nearly doubles. The threshold lies between 0.4 and 0.6 degrees of angle of attack at 1.75 times 10 to the fourth and between 0.45 and 0.65 at 1.55, so the faster the arrow the smaller the angle needed. With a deliberately non-ideal launch the values also cluster around 1.8, that is the arrow alternates between the two regimes during flight. The same programme of tests as the 2015 work, so not an independent confirmation.
The boundary layer transition and the attitude of archery allow · Takamasa Matsumoto, Ryu Ando, Takeshi Miyazaki, Satoshi Taguchi, Hiroki Sugiura
-
2017
For Equipment tests Published later
A peer-reviewed journal article from the same group: in the magnetic suspension tunnel the A/C/E arrow aligned with the flow stays laminar up to a Reynolds number of 15,000, with a drag coefficient of about 1.5, while tilted by three quarters of a degree it turns turbulent at around 11,000 and the coefficient rises from about 1.6 to about 3.1. In free flight, with the angle along the flight worked out by simulation rather than measured, at 17,500 the coefficient stays around 1.5 if the largest angle is below 0.4 degrees and rises to about 2.7 above 0.6, with intermediate values in the transition zone; at 13,000, over 137 launches, the values split around 1.4 and 3.1.
Indeterminacy of drag exerted on an arrow in free flight: arrow attitude and laminar-turbulent transition · T Miyazaki, T Matsumoto, R Ando, J Ortiz, H Sugiura
-
2018
For Model Published later
A simulation of flight over 70 m with the aerodynamic parameters measured in the tunnel and in free flight: the drag coefficient is 1.50 in the laminar regime and 2.69 in the turbulent one, and the ratio of drag to the arrow's weight goes from 0.45 to 0.80 at 57 m/s, with the final lateral scatter growing along with that ratio. The transition threshold stays between 0.40 and 0.60 degrees. If the arrow leaves aligned with the relative airflow, the angle of attack comes out about two orders of magnitude smaller and the drift in the same wind is less. In a 3 m/s head wind the maximum angle is 0.45 degrees and in a tail wind 0.54, that is at the threshold, while in a crosswind of the same strength it reaches 3.0 degrees.
Trajectory and attitude of an archery arrow in free flight:: estimation of the influence of the background wind. · Julio Ortiz, Masato Ando, Takeshi Miyazaki
-
2018
Context Model Published later
A linear stability analysis of the air layer along a shaft with no vanes: with the arrow aligned with the flow, the amplification indicator stays below 2.5 against the roughly 9.8 estimated for transition with the tunnel's 0.05 per cent turbulence, that is the layer can stay laminar. It explains why the measured drag at zero incidence is low. It is a calculation, with no new tests.
Linear stability of the boundary layer flow along an archery arrow · Toshinari Hasegawa, Atsushi Serino, Takeshi Miyazaki, Naoya Takahashi, Reima Iwatsu
-
2020
For Equipment tests Published later
Arrows with short straight vanes launched by compressed air at about 56 m/s and tracked with an inertial sensor inside the shaft: in flight the deceleration falls from 0.65 to 0.30 G as the angle of attack drops below three tenths of a degree, that is when the air layer returns to laminar, and the drag coefficient goes from about 2.45 above a Reynolds number of 1.85 times 10 to the fourth to about 1.35 below 1.8. It is the jump measured in free flight, not in the tunnel.
Experimental and Computational Study of Archery Arrows Fletched with Straight Vanes · Julio Ortiz, Atsushi Serino, Toshinari Hasegawa, Takahito Onoguchi, Hiroki Maemukai, Takeshi Miyazaki, Hiroki Sugiura
-
2022
Context Equipment tests Published later
A/C/E arrows launched by compressed air at 40 to 60 m/s indoors over 55 m, with automatic image analysis at 3,000 frames per second: in free flight the maximum angle of attack stays below one degree, 0.46 and 0.51 degrees with a tapered point and 0.44 with a bulge point, and the angular velocities below 0.5 radians per second. This is the very point that cuts the claim down to size: at an almost identical angle, it was the point shape that decided whether the flow was laminar (tapered point) or turbulent (bulge point). Whoever tunes an arrow has two levers, not one.
Automatic image analysis of an archery arrow in free flight using high-speed video cameras · Riku Murakami, Hiroya Mamori, Takeshi Miyazaki, Naoya Takahashi
-
2025
For Model Published later
A fluid dynamics model of an Easton X10 arrow at 57 m/s, calibrated on the tunnel coefficients from the earlier work: when the air layer shifts from laminar to turbulent the drag coefficient doubles, from 1.63 to 3.23. In a head wind the angle of attack stays at 0.49 degrees at most, so the transition does not happen and the drift stays far smaller. A confirmation by calculation, with tunnel data that are not its own.
Influences of an Arrow’s Aerodynamic Pressure Center on Recurve Bow Shooting · Wenfeng Shen, Liang Hu, Jing Hu, Yiming Xu, Xixia Xu, Jieqing Zheng
Status history
- 2011 Reported The first measurements: half a degree of incidence is enough for the air layer on the shaft to start shifting from laminar to turbulent, and near the critical speed one degree of tilt raises the drag coefficient from about 1.0 to about 1.7. The same work shows, though, that the jump only exists while the flow is still laminar: if it is already turbulent, drag stays nearly constant as the angle changes. Bench tests on the equipment, so direct evidence, but a single laboratory: reported.
- 2012 Reported The effect turns up on competition arrows rather than on a crossbow bolt, and for the first time the threshold has a figure: in the magnetic suspension tunnel, with the angle imposed, about six tenths of a degree is enough for drag to rise, and the threshold is the same with both points. These are still bench measurements from the same laboratory, so the status does not rise.
- 2013 Reported The threshold turns up again with the same arrows and two kinds of vane, slightly higher with Gas Pro than with Spin Wings. It is a confirmation from the same group, so the status holds.
- 2014 Reported In a water tunnel at very low speed, the flow stays attached at the point of four commercial arrows between minus six and plus six degrees of tilt and separates from nine degrees upwards. It is a regime far from that of flight, with Reynolds numbers below a thousand, it says nothing about drag and it appears in a questionable venue: the status does not change.
- 2015 Reported Free flight and calculation bring the threshold down to about half a degree and add two things: the faster the arrow flies, the less tilt it takes to trigger turbulence, and the spin the arrow has as it leaves matters too, because with the right one it flies at almost no incidence. In the same year an independent measurement with a shooting machine finds a drag coefficient of 1.94, that is the turbulent-regime value. All consistent, still without archers.
- 2016 Reported The same group quantifies the jump: the drag coefficient goes from about 1.5 to about 2.6 once the air layer turns turbulent, with the threshold between four and six tenths of a degree, and with a less than ideal launch the arrow can stay in a mixed state, at intermediate drag. The picture gains in figures but not in independent confirmation, so the status holds.
- 2017 Reported A peer-reviewed journal article from the same group finds the threshold again with the angle imposed in the tunnel: at three quarters of a degree the air layer turns turbulent at a Reynolds number of about 11,000 and the drag coefficient goes from about 1.6 to about 3.1. In free flight, with the angle worked out by simulation, at 17,500 the coefficient stays around 1.5 if the largest angle is below 0.4 degrees and rises to about 2.7 above 0.6. The figures firm up, but they come from the same tunnel: the status stays reported.
- 2018 Reported Two calculations take up the mechanism and draw out its consequences for flight over seventy metres: in the turbulent regime drag is nearly double its laminar value and reaches eighty per cent of the arrow's weight, and in a head or tail wind the angle of attack stays at the threshold while in a crosswind of the same strength it goes far beyond it. These are models: they explain without adding evidence.
- 2020 Reported A measurement with an inertial sensor inside the shaft quantifies the jump in free flight, with arrows launched by compressed air: the deceleration falls from 0.65 to 0.30 G as the angle of attack drops below three tenths of a degree, with the drag coefficient going from about 2.45 to about 1.35. The thresholds across the different pieces of work stay consistent and the status does not change.
- 2022 Reported Automatic analysis of high-speed images measures maximum angles of attack below one degree in free flight, and adds a limit to the claim: between a tapered point at 0.46 and 0.51 degrees and a bulge point at 0.44, it was the point shape that decided the flow regime, not the angle. The direction holds, the weight of the tilt has to be cut down to size, so the status does not rise.
- 2025 Reported A fluid dynamics model recovers the jump by calculation: when the air layer around the shaft shifts from laminar to turbulent the drag coefficient doubles, from 1.63 to 3.23, and in a head wind the angle of attack does not go past half a degree, so the transition does not happen and the drift stays far smaller. It is a calculated confirmation, not a new measurement: the status does not move.
Related
Related articles
- Wind and weather conditions in archery: how to read and manage themHow far the wind moves an arrow and why, how many points it costs, how to read and correct for it, and what the data say about rain, cold and heat.
- How much the air slows an arrow down, and what really changes the dragHow much speed an arrow loses in flight, how much the shaft, vanes and point add to air drag, and how much of it actually reaches the target.
- Vanes, feathers or Spin Wings: what actually changesLarge or small vanes, feathers or plastic, vane angle and orientation on the shaft: what the studies measure, and where research has not yet reached the target.
Research lines
Cite
Campagna, M. (2026). An arrow flying at an angle to the airflow suffers far more drag (Version 2). In Evidence Registry. Retrieved 16 October 2026, from https://matteocampagna.com/en/registry/equipment/arrow-at-an-angle-more-drag
@misc{campagna2026_inclinazioneresistenza,
author = {Campagna, Matteo},
title = {An arrow flying at an angle to the airflow suffers far more drag},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {Evidence Registry, matteocampagna.com},
url = {https://matteocampagna.com/en/registry/equipment/arrow-at-an-angle-more-drag},
note = {Version 2; accessed 2026-10-16}
}
Follow this claim
RSS is an address you paste into a feed reader: each time this claim changes status, adds a year to its history or is revised, a new item appears there.
Registry updates by email
At most one email a month, sent only when something has changed: claims that change status, new claims, Lab predictions registered or resolved, new studies and new books.
Sign-ups are handled by Systeme.io, the service that runs the newsletter. Every email has a link to unsubscribe with one click.
Other claims in this domain
- CorroboratedAlong its flight the arrow loses an appreciable part of its launch speed12 studiesStatus since 2011
- CorroboratedAs it leaves the bow, the arrow flexes and snakes around the riser instead of leaving straight19 studies · 47 archers measuredStatus since 2012
- ReportedA camera-based scoring system misreads some arrows: the ones barely sticking out and the ones that shift the target face7 studies · 2 archers measuredStatus since 2017
- ReportedA chest band with fibre optic sensors measures breathing and mean heart rate with small errors, and an archer can wear it while shooting2 studiesStatus since 2019
- ReportedA compound bow stores between 70 and 100 joules and sheds about two thirds of the force at full draw4 studiesStatus since 2015