[MR] SEM move to require anti bounceback devices....Ie Nock

[Rupert Gaddy]

Attached is the email I posted and the reply I received to my comments to
the SEM regarding the problem at Gulf Wars:

> Greetings,
> 
> You may remember me from our extended conversations when I applied for the
> deputy position of Society Archer Marshal.
> 
> From the discussions on the CA list it seems there were some problems at
> Gulf Wars.  I was not able to attend due to a work conflict but have
> followed the list discussions and talked with a number of people who did
> attend the event.
> 
> Since we now have a well documented eye injury (caused I believe from a
> crossbow blunt) and a documented near eye injury due to a bounceback off a
> spear into the archer's helm...(don't know the  bow type for sure, but
> discussion implies a crossbow) I assume that you will again be considering
> the requirement of eye protection.
> 
> While I strongly support the use of eye protection, I am strongly opposed
> to requiring it only in combat archery scenarios, which I fear will be the
> path taken.  This will, for all intents and purposes banish CA in some
> kingdoms such as Atlantia where my past efforts to require eye protection
> when I was KAM was met with the statement that we will ban CA before we
> screen helms,  that attitude still exists.
> 
> If I compare the known eye injuries from arrows to those of regular heavy
> combat, based on my experince as a fighter, archer, and marshal, as well as
> stories, etc, the risk of an eye injury is greater in heavy combat w/o CA
> than with it. Sticks, low limbs, even stiff grass has caused eye injuries
> at a higher rate that CA.
> 
> Thus I urge you, IF (and I hope you do) require eye protection as a SCA
> minimum, PLEASE make it across the board for all fighters not just in the
> CA scenarios.
> 
> On a second front, I think it is time to reexamine the crossbow issues.  
> 
> The way we currently measure the effectiveness of a cross bow, IE a nut
> pound measurement, is proving to allow a great deal of variation in
> crossbows used for CA.  A crossbow with a less effective prod at 600 inch
> pounds is not the same as a cross bow with a very effective prod at 600
> inch pounds.
> 
> Another consideration is that crossbows can NOT be adjusted on the field to
> allow less than a full draw at a closer target in the way a recurve or long
> bow can be.  My own observation is that it is almost always the crossbows
> that are producing bounceback problems.
> 
> With in improvements in bolt design, the cross bow needs a new examination. 
> 
>  I suggest both that
> (1) a better way of measuring the crossbow standards be found
> (2) that the crossbows be given a longer minimum shot distance than the
> recurves in CA, both because of the inability to adjust draw (why give
> bruises at 15 feet when you can get acknowledgement with less power) and to
> combat the bounceback which observable from the crossbows at closer ranges
> 
> Respectfully submitted for you attention and consideration
> 
> Ld Rupert the Persistent
> (Order of the Yew Bow, Atlantia)
> (Former Kingdom Archer Marshal, Atlantia)
> (bunch of other stufff.....)

Return-Path: <ksca at socket.net>
From: ksca at socket.net
To: Rupert Gaddy <Rgaddy1 at mindspring.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 15:02:03 -0600
Subject: Re: CA and eye injuries
Reply-to: ksca at socket.net
Priority: normal

Greetings,
Thank you for your comments, we are indeed discussing the issue of CA 
grill-penetration, as we have been for well over a year now (the issue was 
never resolved-ongoing discussions and experiments have been underway 
all along). We had 3-separate injuries at GW resulting from a CA missile 
penetrating a grill, one of which was an injury to a knight's eye. We had 
over 20 reports of grill pentration which did not result in an injury. I very 
much suspect this increase is not an anomaly, just a simple matter of us 
actually paying attention, and reporting these incidents. To my knowledge, 
the eye injury is a first, however.

Requiring eye protection for fighters (such as goggles, screening, etc.) is 
not now, and never has been, a viable option in this issue. To require over 
15000 fighters to significantly alter their equipment just so approximately 
1000 archers can shoot at them is absurd. I realize there are other risks of 
eye injury in SCA combat, but do not consider it to be anywhere the level of 
risk which would require such drastic action. The onus of making arrows 
safe for SCA combat must rest with the archers, not with the fighters they 
shoot at. This is where the current discussions are at. Sir John Fitz-Rauf 
has been continuing the experments with ABD's and alternate, blunt-nocks 
he began during his tenure as Society archery Marshal. Any insight or 
input you might have along these lines would be most welcome, and should 
be directed towards my Deputy for Archery, Gwylym. 

We are also reevaluating the crossbow poundage after all the complaints at 
GW, and again, any commentary and/or input would be most welcome, 
and should be directed to my Deputy for Archery, Gwylym. 

Thank you,
Eringlin Aldhelm


A number of us (archers and heavies from several kingdoms) discussed this
at Fools War, and the vast majority still feel that eye protection rather
than weapons modification is the best way to go since it provides optimum
protection in all types of combat.  Lexan sheilds or glasses should be
mandatory in all woods battles if the SEM is serious about eye protection.
According to my now deceased Opthmalogist, he would rather deal with a
relatively clean arrow nock injury than a dirty stick or fiberous weed injury.

I wish someone else with better contacts in the field than I have would
investigate this......... 

Unfortunately many combat archers are already interpreting this as an
attempt to limit or ban combat archery in the society, or force us all back
to golftubes.  Sir Jon has supposedly invented a nock for fiberglass or
wooden arrows that would prevent them from entering a helm, but I have not
seen or tested the devices. Regardless, I tend to resist products that are
only available from a single source...anyone get one of Baldars bad lots a
while back?

Personally as a one eyed guy already, I wear my hardened glasses or my
handball goggles when I go into missle combat or a woods battle.


Rupert the Persistent