Viewing results of flight shoots

[Badger]

  I thought keeping a sheet like this up dated could make for a quick overview of results.

[Badger]

  I guess it won't print the file. I will try and photograph it tomorrow and post it as a photo. Just a simple spreadsheet that we populate each time results are turned in.

[Del the cat]

I managed to view it, although it did say there was some unreadable content.
Looked fine to me.
Attached is my 2nd draft of ELB spec' for perusal and comment.
Del

[Badger]

  Del, I would ageee with the rules as you have written them.

[avcase]

I was finally able to open the files.

Steve,
It looks like you are showing a distribution of measured distances instead of a score sheet.  It would get pretty big if you threw in the weight class divisions.

Del,
I think that looks pretty good. I like how you have defined the drawn shape. Is the 5/8 ratio the only cross section geometry requirement?  A round belly is not required?  What about the arrow requirements?  Would you propose any string requirements?

Alan

[Badger]

  Yes Allen, not a score sheet, just a distribution of distances turned in. I would be nice for referencing.

 I believe Del acepted 40% of bow length for arrow length on an elb.

Mark had a good suggestion on strings, where if somebody chose to reshoot a bow under official flight rules he could do so.

[Del the cat]

Del,
I think that looks pretty good. I like how you have defined the drawn shape. Is the 5/8 ratio the only cross section geometry requirement?  A round belly is not required?  What about the arrow requirements?  Would you propose any string requirements?

Alan

IMO A D shape or round belly is a somewhat Victorian concept. Some of the Mary Rose bows are nearer round or square in section.
We could prohibit a dead flat belly by saying:-
A straight edge placed across the belly shall not sit flat but must rock to demonstrate some curvature.
But I feel it's hardly worth the effort.
Trying to define round or D shaped is an argument waiting to happen.
Marc's story of how he had to withdraw a bow because the belly was "too flat" filled me with despair, so I thought, just keep it simple.
At what point is a square with rounded corners become round? 
I think the spirit of 'longbow' is established with these rules. My only reservation is length and I've been willing to compromise on that.

Arrow and string requirements are covered elsewhere I believe.
Del

BTW
I think these rules would actually translate to Warbow too, with a simple lower weight limit. Doubtless the Warbow fraternity will want to stipulate their own rules, but what I've seen of the EWBS society definition it doesn't make sense!
E.G. They should be based on MR bows but can't have reflex.... D'uh... quite a few MR bows have reflex. (OK we don't know if it was there before the ship went down)

[Ian.]

Del - the EWBS do allow reflexed bows and I wish you would stop saying they didn't, what isn't allowed is artificially induced reflex.

The proposed warbow definition isn't perfect, let the WarbowWales guys give some input if they want to, they are probably the best to make those comments. As far as length goes it really needs to be a set figure, it certainly can't be down to arrow length or the archer. I would propose 72" it's the lowest complete length for MR (I think) and is short enough to allow shorter arrows to be shot efficiently.

[Badger]

  Good comments Ian. What do you guys know about the "European Taditional Archery Society"?

  I am wondering if it might be a good avenue to make tradtional flight shooting more well known.

[Ian.]

I would be incredibly careful in conversation with ETAS. Their UK shoot was/are run by none other that Steve Stratton and where he is bad things always follow.  ETAS members on the continent are a great bunch of people but are, and always will be, allies of Steve first.

Your idea for a world flight organisation is a great one but the organisation you propose should be separate and not equal to other societies currently run, then when things are official entertain proposals for other societies to join you, not the other way round. Be the UN of flight archery if you will, but less buying of power.

[Lucasade]

Your idea for a world flight organisation is a great one but the organisation you propose should be separate and not equal to other societies currently run, then when things are official entertain proposals for other societies to join you, not the other way round. Be the UN of flight archery if you will, but less buying of power.

I would second that - do what you want, make it great and other societies will queue up to join you. Try to please them and you'll make no one happy or really offer them an incentive to come to you.

[Badger]

      I am not familair with the organization but I appreciate the heads up. I am just looking for ways to get this organization off the ground and running. I would suspect that different cultures around the globe would have an empahsis on different types of bows.

[Del the cat]

Del - the EWBS do allow reflexed bows and I wish you would stop saying they didn't, what isn't allowed is artificially induced reflex.

The proposed warbow definition isn't perfect, let the WarbowWales guys give some input if they want to, they are probably the best to make those comments. As far as length goes it really needs to be a set figure, it certainly can't be down to arrow length or the archer. I would propose 72" it's the lowest complete length for MR (I think) and is short enough to allow shorter arrows to be shot efficiently.

Pardon me, I wasn't actually trying to write a Warbow spec'. I was contributing a longbow spec' for discussion. But it would be nice to have a sound warbow spec. Although If I make a longbow that happens to draw 90# I can call it a longbow rather than a warbow.
This rather begs the question.
Is a "Warbow" spec' necessary at all unless there is an upper draw weight cut off for longbow?

Heat bending and inducing bend while seasoning has been part of the bowyers armoury for millennia.
So...  artificially induced reflex isn't allowed?
And how pray do you tell the difference?

And what about an asymmetric bow with one limb having natural reflex, One isn't allowed to bend the other to match... but one is allowed to heat bend the reflex out to match the straight limb?

That doesn't appear to be consistent or logical.

Del

[Badger]

  I expect that we will have some negotiating to do with one another on some of the rules. I would be difficult to determing if reflex was induced or not. What abut heat treating? I would imaging the existing war bow rules just might fall right into place, possibly they have a few things they feel need adjustment. I will suggest over in the war bow forum that they start their own thread on the rules they would like to see in place. The final decision they can hopefully agree on.

[Ian.]

It doesn't have to be done yet but we should start a new thread for the 'warbow' spec I think: it's going to cause more problems than ever single other category combined and it has to be done well initially. My personal opinion is that both heat treating and reflexing are vital tools in the bowyers armoury and should never be banned, why they ever were is a mystery to me.

You're completely right about how ridiculous the EWBS spec is Del but they never followed their own rules anyway.  I feel like it can be sorted but forcing the thickness taper to be very close to a real MR taper. Reflexing a thin bow is difficult but can be done, and the skill of tillering a reflexed bow should be rewarded. Given the MR taper (which is thin) you simply wont be able to tiller extremes of reflex, and if you can well done. Recurving the tip is something which can be stopped by defining over by what length the deflection should take. Basically the unbraced bow can have bends in all directions but if you were to put a straight edge along any part of the bow, (I think about 30cm/12") the middle of that straight edge cannot be more then x away from the back of the bow, so the entire bow can have a reflex which might be considered high but no part can seriously reflexed at any single point.

You can do a similar thing with the belly profile: uploading a curved template PDF with some kind of scale guide that maps have so it can be printed out consistently by everyone around the world. The bowyer should cut out and place the profile on the belly of the bow, the bow must be one evenly worked surface and profile template must touch the very middle of the template, if it only touches the edges then it's obviously too flat, that way a certain level of flatness would be avoided. Giving us a consistent world wide profile.

Del - do those two points make sense, you're the other person here who makes these bows?