Re: Arrow Problems

["Greg Prevost" <gregp@ix.netcom.com>]

Poster: "Greg Prevost" <gregp@ix.netcom.com>


-----Original Message-----
From: Sarah Prunier <szprun@maila.wm.edu>
To: atlantia@adm.csc.ncsu.edu <atlantia@adm.csc.ncsu.edu>
Date: Thursday, November 12, 1998 4:32 PM
Subject: Arrow Problems


>
>Poster: Sarah Prunier <szprun@maila.wm.edu>
>
>If there were safety tests before the arrow in question was allowed in
>combat then the possibility of an arrow bouncing back nock first would have
>been discovered. Further assuming this phenomenon had been discovered it
>must have been evaluated and determined to be a small risk. As we all know
>that small risk means there is some risk. Therefore unless we can eliminate
>all risk (we can't) then we have to live with the fact that statistically
>there is no way to avoid accidents.
>
>In summery the only way I feel it is reasonable to pull these arrows is if
>there wasn't thorough testing in the first place.
>
>Can anyone verify if there was testing? And if so, what type?
>
>Just trying to look at this logically,
>
>Sarah of Rencester
>
>=======================================================================
>List Archives, FAQ, FTP:  http://merryrose.atlantia.sca.org/
>            Submissions:  atlantia@atlantia.sca.org
>        Admin. requests:  majordomo@atlantia.sca.org

Sarah,
    go to :
http://www.pbm.com/~lindahl/articles/anti_bounce.html

I've read it, sounds pretty thorough to me.

Rachel

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