Flu-flu's or speed blunts?

[NigelT]

Hi everyone,

As part of my review of the NAAMA Missile Combat Rules, this question inevitably gets raised. Some folk come from places where speed blunts (combat arrows with normal target feathers) get used and they love them or hate them. Others come from places where flu-flu's (combat arrows with full height feathers designed to slow the arrow down faster) are used and again either love them or hate them.

There are many pros and cons to each. Some of the major ones I've listed here:

Speed-blunts:
* They fly faster and further, giving your target less time to react, and allowing you to use them from a greater distance.
* They hit harder than flu-flu's and are not as audience-friendly if a stray shot does head towards a public gallery.

Flu-flus:
* They don't hit as hard and are therefore safer for combatants and the public.
* It's harder to score 'kills' because the arrows fly slower and often make an audible whistling sound as they fly, giving targets warning and time to react.

There are other pros and cons, but those are the big ones as I see them.

We (NAAMA) are currently using flu-flu's at most events. Some individual clubs are using speed blunts for their own trainins, but for the most part clubs have adopted the flu-flu as a standard.

The current NAAMA Missile Combat Rules have been in place for three years now. That's probably long enough for most people to have a feel for how things are going, even if they haven't got all the kit to take part themselves.

So, if you had the option to switch to speed blunts, would you make the switch, or would you keep the status quo?

Cheers,
Nigel

[Callum]

I don't do combat archery but Fungus and I are looking at organising a "combined arms" camp this July integrating cavalry, infantry and archers into the mix. Horses add in a completely different factor to the mix and I would prefer flu-flu's for this type of event.

[Nathan]

Personally I don't mind either, though the situation involved may limit the use of one or the other.

With speed blunts though there would need to be a slightly high level of minimum kit required i belive.

[BigMac]

How about speed blunts at our events and flu-flus at Public stuff?

TTFN

[ChronicD]

[Eachan]

I agree with the above two, but I think it has to be made really clear what blunts are allowed where so theres no confusion. Perhaps an if it doubt just use flu flus rule should be applied

[Fungus]

As someone who gets hit by arrows I would prefer flu flus because they are less likley to leave a bruise through a gambison as im not fully plated(yet)
Plus if an accident happens a flu flu is not going as fast as speed blunts so less likley to do serious damage

[Stuart]

It has to be flus. Speed blunts have three times the ballestic energy of normal flus, and you can`t see them coming. We had injuries with them in the UK, and banned the bloody things 25 years ago.
I dread to think what might have happened to our recent accident victim had he been struck by a speed blunt..

[Robbo]

I voted for "I don't mind which" ... in reality it should probably have been more along the lines of "I don't have the archery experience to make a call" :s

[Angel]

I like standard fletching more than I like flu-flus - they fly faster and more accurately, and my enemy sometimes doesn't see them coming.

But they are used in a context where everyone is sufficiently armoured that a surprise shot isn't an issue, and is often the objective.

You get bruises, sure, but everyone likes to show those off.

You'd drastically increase the available pool of arrows if you allowed standard fletching, as the SCA folks wouldn't need to make a whole new set just to join in. I can't actually use my current set of flu-flus at SCA events as the shaft diameter is too large. I'm effectively having to maintain two sets which is slightly annoying.

[Bogue]

I voted for speed blunts.

Now some may say "why should you care you don't fight or do combat archery"

Currently true

But I have been shot and shot at with target field points. Stuck in leg barely.

I have been shot at and hit with speed blunts. Hit in only unarmoured area at 2nd folklore, bottom lip fractured tooth barely (took four years to break off).

I have been shot at, but never ever hit with Flu-flus (usually have time to step out of the way).

If in a mixed combat scenario I would far prefer the archer had a chance of hitting me. You shouldn't really be able to catch them as they waffle past you.

If the idea behind combat archery is to instill a touch more reality into the game by having projectiles rain down at the speed of a parachutist then stay with flu-flus. If a person is armoured to combat archery rules then speed blunts will make it more fun.

If my memory serves correctly (Always questionable) weren't fluflus adopted because they were more suitable for lesser armoured targets.

my $0.50 worth


cheers
Bogue

[NigelT]

Thanks everyone for your feedback, some great comments there and many valid points being made. Keep it coming.

Yes, Flu-flu's were originally selected over speed blunts because we didn't have a pool of heavily armoured combatants and weren't likely to change that in the short term. As it stands there are perhaps 15 people in New Zealand who have archery safe armour and if we're lucky we get half of them on the field at any one time. Personally I wouldn't like to see us going to speed blunts unless we had a lot more archery-safe people on the field. In other words, I'd like to see it becoming a standard part of peoples kit. I appreciate that this isn't going to happy anytime soon though, so I'm in favour of staying with flu-flu's. The issues with public displays and speed-blunts is certainly a strong argument in support of that too.

Several of you have said you'd happy maintain two sets of arrows - one set of speed blunts for private use and one set of flu-flu's for public displays. But honestly, would you really do that? I can see people collecting speed-blunts because they'll be used most of the time and then when it comes to public displays, there will be mass begging and borrowing off of those few who have flu-flu's still. Given that there are probably four times more archers than people who have combat arrows as it stands, I can't really see people maintaining two sets.

Kerry - you're quite right about it being easier for the SCA folk to participate if we changed to speed blunts and reduced the shaft diameter to 8mm max - which is actually was in the spec, we were just a little lax at enforcing it and there are quite a few 9mm shafts out there - mine included. Aside from yourself, how many other archers would we regularly get at NAAMA events do you think? Would it be siginificant enough to make this a really compelling factor?

Stuart - interesting that the UK have banned [edit] speed blunts. Is this because most of their events are public or is it primarily due to participant safety?

Bogue - there's no reason you can't have an opinion without being a current archer or target. As to being shot at by target points... um... no comment

Keep the feedback coming people. This is really good stuff. Thanks.

Nigel

[Eachan]

I agree with your point about the two sets of arrows, being a frequent arrow bludger myself ... I think fun wise speed blunts sound cool to play with, but in practice its best to stick with the fluflus for now..

[Grayson]

As a non participating (due to geographical difficulties) target, Id have to agree with the comments that if we move to speed blunts then the kit requirements and archers training would have to be ramped up a bit.

I personally have the confidence in my kit to stand up to speed blunts, and it would lend a sense of reality to the fact you wont have time to react to the arrow shots.

So I'd lean towards speed blunts, if the requirments were raised and enforced for saftey

[NigelT]

I know there are a few of you out there with speed blunts. If any of you are coming to Eketahuna Hard camp, could you bring along a few speed blunts in addition to your flu-flus, we can do some test shooting with them to demonstrate the difference between speed blunts and flu-flus. If anyone wants to know how much harder they hit, they can volunteer to be shot at with both.

Cheers,
Nigel