[Ansteorra-archery] Results From my Testing of New Combat Arrows - Possible New Design

Thu Sep 4 18:09:56 PDT 2008

You are missing the point - these were wrapped in 2 to 3 layers Duct 
Tape then in strapping tape so there is support for the foam, which does 
prevent them from sliding around.

The other point is what is the issue with testing out this design that I 
have been using all these years...

My combat arrows have been in what would have been hour long rez battles 
and they turned into much longer battles with heavy fighters standing on 
them, kneeling on them, kicking them, falling on them the entire time. 
The foam with the Duct Tape did not give away nor did they get that soft 
- in fact with the Duct Tape, they do get a bit hard and stiffer over time.

And when I take the field, I am Not out on either flank, but down in the 
middle shooting straight into the opposing side, so the majority of my 
combat arrows are seeing a lot more abuse than most other archers. 
Because they are Not bouncing off and laying along the sides but they 
are in the middle of the fighting the entire time, especially if it is a 
gate or bridge battle. They have not failed due to the design.

Ld Michael Kettering 
Combat Archer 
Missile Marshal 

Ken Theriot wrote:
> There is one big difference between my thrusting tips and my arrow tips.  My
> sword doesn't get trampled on dozens of times by other combatants because it
> got flung to the ground in the middle of an hour-long rez battle and could
> not be picked up!  Every time someone steps on the tip of an arrow, it
> weakens the foam just a bit more.  Eventually it gets soft or misshapen
> enough that the foam CAN penetrate a grill when it couldn't when new.
>
>  
>
> That's why the new rule does not allow us to simply use a wider blunt.  Even
> a 1.5 inch blunt with the old rule would still have enough padding in front
> of it to be smooshed after getting trampled on enough times.  
>
>  
>
> Dinner is calling.gotta run:-).
>
>  
>
> Kenneth    
>
>   _____  
>
> From: Mike [mailto:meggiddo at netzero.net] 
> Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 6:54 PM
> To: Archery within the Kingdom of Ansteorra
> Subject: Re: [Ansteorra-archery] Results From my Testing of New Combat
> Arrows - Possible New Design
>
>  
>
> What we are trying to recreate is a thrusting tip, which is what the heavy
> fighters have been using on their swords, spears, and pole arms for
> sometime. 
>
> Based upon feedback local heavy fighters, which was need to stiffen up the
> combat head on the UHMW, from this feedback. I started building thrusting
> tips for my combat arrows - UHMW (1 inch long and 1.25 inches in diameter).
> The construction involves 3 3/8 inches foam disks glue together, then glued
> on the end of the UHMW combat head (the edges both leading and trailing have
> smoothed or rounded off). 
>
> Once the foam had set (about a day or so - I usually give it 2 days per
> arrow). I then wrapped the entire package - the leading edge of foam disks
> and all the way down the UHMW combat head in two to three wraps of Duct
> Tape. Then applied strapping tape over the entire combat head assembly. 
>
> The local heavy fighters and I tested it out, years ago, and it works - a
> nice strict package which does not allow any part of the foam tip to enter
> the grill. Then of course, we did not have all the "testing equipment"
> available to us either. But just shooting it into a grill of a legal grill
> on a helm on the ground at a distance of 3 feet, saw no impact nor did it
> stick. Used a 30 lb. recurve at full draw. No impact clay behind the grill
> to see if there was any type of penetration. 
>
> I have been shooting this type of design for the last 5 years. 
>
> I was just wondering why one one thought of this design. 
>
> I have also cross posted to the SCA Missile list as well.
>
>
> Ld Michael Kettering 
> Combat Archer 
> Missile Marshal 
>
>
>
> Ken Theriot wrote: 
>
> I have honestly forgotten which list is the new one, so I'm sending this to
> all of them.
>  
>  
>  
> I spend some time experimenting with different types of padding, and methods
> to apply the wrap.  I had sticky-back 1/4-in. foam left over from Gulf Wars
> and I had the stuff that Eadric suggested, the sticky-back 2-mm. foam from
> Walmart (Darice).  It turns out that, on my arrows anyway, the 1/4-in. wrap
> was WAY more than was needed (about 1-3/4 in. diameter after taping).  I
> applied strapping tape around the wrap as tight as I could, and there really
> was very little in the way of compression.    
>  
>  
>  
> I made a majority of my original arrows with a leather disc on the tip, and
> even before applying a side-wrap, the diameter of the vast majority of these
> tips was already about 1-3/8 inches.  So 1 of the Darice 2-mm. sticky-back
> strips was really all that was needed.  
>  
>  
>  
> Nevertheless, I conducted an experiment with the ones I wrapped with 1/4-in.
> foam.  I shot 6 of the old arrows from my longbow.  They flew an average
> distance of 37 yards with very little variation.  Then I shot 6 of the
> fatter retrofit arrows from exactly the same spot.  There was no significant
> difference in the distance (or variation) that they flew!  Though it seems
> logical (and is definitely true to some degree) that a wider face would
> encounter more wind-resistance, and a heavier head would not fly as far; in
> (my) real-world testing, those differences were negligible, and amounted to
> basically no real difference at all.  
>  
>  
>  
> I did NOT conduct a test of impact force.  But the observations mentioned
> about folks being hit by arrows not feeling them may not be indicative of a
> cause-consequence situation from the retrofit.  Obviously I can't say this
> for certain, but I would bet money that if those same individuals were hit
> with the old arrows, their answers would have been the same.  A valid
> experiment would be to get some willing stick jocks (hey, I get to say that
> because I'm a knight;)) to let us shoot a random mix of old and new arrows
> at them, and report their reaction to the hits (blind experiment).  That
> would eliminate any possible bias on the part of the target....I mean other
> fighter;).  There still could be some bias in the way the testing archer
> since they would be able to see which arrow they were shooting.  But if we
> set up a way for the archer to shoot accurately WITHOUT knowing which arrows
> they were, we could do a double-blind experiment and have actual evidence of
> the differences, if any, in perceived impact to another human fighter.  
>  
>  
>  
> Does it suck?  Yup.  But if we give up in disgust, then we let the "enemies
> of CA" win!  Those "enemies," are mostly (not entirely) the dukes and other
> hot sticks who feel their years of training, and their amazing god-like
> skill should not be vulnerable to a weapon that a newbie can learn in a day.
> We all know the arguments: how effective archery would have been in our
> period, presumed armor, plate armor, arrows and bows used at different
> times, archery is unchivalrous, blah, blah, blah.  That is pure doggy doo.
> If ANYONE brings that argument up, all we have to do is say, "yeah, and a
> single hit with a 1-handed broadsword to a steel helmet would barely make a
> dent.  And wrap shots?  Shyaa!  Oh, and I love the
> "fighting-from-your-knees" part after someone slices one of your legs open
> (or off)."  Almost nothing we do as fighters in the SCA is "realistic."  But
> one thing is for sure, archers were an integral part of medieval battle, and
> there is no way I foresee a day when combat archery disappears from the SCA.
>  
>  
>  
>  
> Anyway, this has been my 2-pence (OK, maybe a more like 9 or 10) on the
> situation.
>  
>  
>  
> Kenneth   
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>   _____  
>  
> From: Paul Thorne [mailto:paul.v.thorne at gmail.com] 
> Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 8:49 AM
> To: Archery within the Kingdom of Ansteorra; mm at lists.ansteorra.org; Missile
> combat in Ansteorra
> Subject: [Mm] Society Changes
>  
>  
>  
> Greetings Archers of Ansteorra,
>  
>    With much discussion the Society Combat Archery Marshal has revised the
> recent rule change to allow the maximum padding to be 1.25" now.  This means
> that all of our current ammunition will be legal with the simple addition of
> a sidewrap to increase the blunt diameter to 1.5".  So as of right now the
> Society standard for padding is 1/2" minimum to 1.25" maximum.
>  
>  
>  
> HL Jean-Paul de Calmont, CAO
> Kingdom Missile Marshal, Ansteorra
>  
>  
>   
>  
>
>
>
>
>
>   _____  
>
>
>
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Ansteorra-archery mailing list
> Ansteorra-archery at lists.ansteorra.org
> http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-archery-ansteorra.org
>   
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________ 
> Criminal Lawyers - Click here.
> <http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2242/fc/Ioyw6i4vB10Tiqo5BNpp80Ft8s0I
> 9afa59wQYr2RDYdeYT1iN0uPm5/> 
>
>
>   
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ansteorra-archery mailing list
> Ansteorra-archery at lists.ansteorra.org
> http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-archery-ansteorra.org
>   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ansteorra.org/pipermail/ansteorra-archery-ansteorra.org/attachments/20080904/31a2494b/attachment-0001.htm>