[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Search Archives]

Re: Suspension of Certain Combat Arrows

Poster: Logan & Arielle <sirlogan@mail.clt.bellsouth.net>

Actually they are more dangerous than woods battles.  When I run through
trees (believe me when I tell you that if you are part of the Cav (or not!)
and you run through he trees at Pennsic (since that is the 'tree line' in
question) you have an idea when a low lying branch is gonna' hit you in the
face.  So as far as that part of it goes I disagree with Janos simply
because I _know_ where the trees and their branches are.

Arrows, however, come from any angle, hit anyone in the helm (the biggest
reasons for bounce backs) whether good (Atlantian) or bad (anyone else, and
I mean ANYONE) and could bounce back.  I do agree that there is the chance
that we will lose an eye to arrows one of these days.  I agree that we
should try to prevent that.  However, banning "baldar (what a dic.......
ooops never mind) blunts" is probably not the answer.

Logan (ya' know..... that Atlantian Duke guy..)

Julien de Montfort wrote:

> Poster: Julien de Montfort <julien@spiaggia.org>
> While Gorm has a couple of good points, I do wish to reiterate that
> combat arrows of all kinds, and Baldar Blunts in particular, have been
> tested repeatedly not only in independent tests but also by virtue of
> literally years of use on the combat field, with an exteremely low
> incidence of injuries (to be honest, this is the first apparently
> verified incident I've heard of, and even back when the issue was
> raised last year on the SCA Missile Weapons List, when they were
> compiling the latest version of Society-wide standards for missile
> weapons, I remember that no-one could come up with more than one
> verified injury on the field due to bounceback and that was out of
> years of experience represented on that list).
> As the other gentle brought up, I don't feel this is any more
> dangerous, and certainly far less dangerous, than your average woods
> battle.  When combat arrows boince off people, they tend to either drop
> fairly close down to the target or spin outward as opposed to a
> straight linear bounceback -- a straight bounceback, especially in
> excess of a couple feet, would be a breathtakingly rare occurence on
> the field, I would hazard to say.  "Laboratory Testing" is fine, but
> usually those are done with stationary targets, such as walls or
> dummies, and seldom against moving targets as you would have on the
> field, or against individuals in tabards, or leather, or with
> funny-shaped elbow cops, etc.  Such differences can make extraordinary
> changes in results.
> In light of the injuries (actually, I had only heard of a single
> injury, and that was a cut to the cheek of a fighter, and not two of
> them, but I have no idea as to what actually occured), I think it was
> wise for Steafan to look back into the question of them, but to suspend
> them during the process I feel is a bit on the harsh side.  As
> mentioned, the Baldars have been verified and okayed through much of
> the known world for a long time now, and to suspend a weapon every time
> the is an injury would be crushing to the sport we all enjoy.  Imagine
> if, as a result of a broken wrist at event X, swords were suspended
> from use until the Earl Marshal did more testing on them?
> The heavies out there may checkle a bit at the ludicrousness of that
> possibility, but to many combat archers, that is exactly what the
> current situation has done.  For this most recent Kingdom's Crusade
> event, the Crown had put a call out to Atlantia that they wished to see
> no less than 40 archers on the field this year.  Our canton rose to the
> challenge, and we fielded 11 of the 30 or so that were in attendance.
> In preparation to that, we, as a group, spent upwards of $1000 in
> supplying everyone with dozens and dozens of arrows, correct-poundage
> bows, field-legal armor, etc., all to the standard which was adopted by
> Atlantia.  Now the vast majority of that equipment has been rendered
> inoperable for the time being.
> I am all for safety, and I am all for safe equipment and regs that
> support same.  But this is a dangerous sport by its very nature,
> however you look at it, and injuries do and will happen.  A happy
> medium is drawn between what a person is willing to risk, and the
> enjoyment they get out of their sport.  With an apparent track record
> of safety that is better than virtually any other weapon we have out
> there on field, to see a particular type of tested, approved and common
> arrowhead withdrawn at each possible incidence of injury seems a bit
> hasty, IMHO.
> My Thanks,
> Julien
> On 11/11/98, Gorm of Berra spoke thusly:
> > Poster: Gorm of Berra <gormofberra@mindspring.com>
> >
> > Lewis, Don wrote:
> > >
> > > Poster: "Lewis, Don" <don@infodata.com>
> > >
> > > Hello everyone.   There were allot and I mean allot of the baldar
> >blunted
> > > arrows used at Kingdom Crusades this year and I saw no problem with
> >these
> > > arrows.  What has happened that would stop the use of these combat
> >arrows?
> >
> > At Kingdom's Crusades this year there were two injuries caused by
> > "bounceback" of baldar blunted arrows.
> >
> > For those who may not be familiar with the term, "bounceback" is when
> >an
> > arrow richocets straight back when it hits a target.  Unlike the front
> > end of an arrow, which is padded up to at least 1 1/4 inches by
> >padding,
> > blunts, or other means, the back end is no bigger than the nocking
> > point.
> >
> > Also, nocking points are rather pointy in and of themselves.  This may
> > not be necessary, but it seems to be true.
> >
> > So, when these arrows are travelling backwards, it is very easy for
> >the
> > nock to slip into an area of a fighter's armor that the head
> >wouldn't.
> > And then cause injury, including the possibility of putting someone's
> > eye out literally.
> >
> > Because our arrows are not sharp and pointy on the tip, there will
> > always be some minimal bounceback, but some independant tests have
> > demonstrated bouncebacks in excess of 10 feet.  This is dangerous.
> >
> > However, I would think the solution lies not in the tip end, but in
> >the
> > nock end of the arrow.  Making the nock less dangerous would seem to
> >be
> > the best solution.  There is a web page created by the Society Archer
> > Marshall (I am not certain if he is the current AM, or a past AM)
> >where
> > he describes a device that appears, on initial testing at least, to
> > reduce the likelihood of injury significantly.
> >
> > The URL is:  http://www.pbm.com/~lindahl/articles/anti_bounce.html
> >
> > I would encourage everyone involved in CA activities, and everyone
> > interested in them, to peruse this article and consider.  Even if this
> > is not the best solution, it would seem to be at least a springboard
> >for
> > constructive leaps forward.
> >
> > Gorm of Berra
> > gormofberra@mindspring.com
> > I'm not a combat archer, but my lady is...her arrows aren't affected,
> >as
> > she uses Markland Style blunts, but the problem is bigger than just
> > that.
> >
> >=======================================================================
> > List Archives, FAQ, FTP:  http://merryrose.atlantia.sca.org/
> >             Submissions:  atlantia@atlantia.sca.org
> >         Admin. requests:  majordomo@atlantia.sca.org
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Seigneur Julien de Montfort                  De sable, seme d'hermines
> "Solum Dice Nullus Sunt Suficio"             d'or, tres amphorae et un
> Seneschal, Web Minister, pursuivant@large        caid palissade argent
> Canton de Spiaggia Levantina                   http://www.spiaggia.org
> Bright Hills, Atlantia                             julien@spiaggia.org
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> =======================================================================
> List Archives, FAQ, FTP:  http://merryrose.atlantia.sca.org/
>             Submissions:  atlantia@atlantia.sca.org
>         Admin. requests:  majordomo@atlantia.sca.org

List Archives, FAQ, FTP:  http://merryrose.atlantia.sca.org/
            Submissions:  atlantia@atlantia.sca.org
        Admin. requests:  majordomo@atlantia.sca.org