Alvarro
Too many posts...
Posts:301
 |
| 07/20/2006 2:17 PM |
 Alert
|
Society rules no longer forbid an "s" curve in heavy rapier blades. This is reasonable, as heavy blades are quite different from epee's and foils. We should remove this section.
|
|
Prudence. Temperance. Fortitude. Justice. |
|
|
welder
Provost
Posts:95
|
| 07/21/2006 5:21 PM |
Alert
|
Posted By Alvarro on 07-20-2006 2:17 PM
Society rules no longer forbid an "s" curve in heavy rapier blades. This is reasonable, as heavy blades are quite different from epee's and foils. We should remove this section.
Since I seem to have been randomly selected to contribute to this forum, let me start by suggesting that removing the "S"-curve prohibition would be a bad idea. Even heavier rapier blades are designed to flex away some of the force of a blow, but two opposite curves often work against one another for the first instant after impact, effectively stiffening the blade until the conflicting forces work themselves out and something bends, somewhere. In addition, two opposing bends in the blade mean that, for the same force, each diverge the blade only half as much from the line of attack. Thus if the blade were to break, the jagged end would be better aligned for an accidental and potentially deadly thrust with the jagged tip. Lastly, "S"-curved blades are not that difficult to prevent and or correct, so why remove a prohibition that serves a useful purpose to save a minimal amount of effort?
William Elder
Randomly-Selected External Rule Consultant
|
|
|
|
|
Alvarro
Too many posts...
Posts:301
|
| 07/21/2006 6:13 PM |
Alert
|
Frankly, a break isn't that big a deal with the weapons we are allowing now. They break nice and flat.
The rule as written and practiced states that once an "s" curve appears in a blade, it has to be tossed, as it is no longer considered safe. It *is* safe to simply straighten del tin and hanwei blades. They will bend again before they snap...the only snaps I've seen from a hanwei actually occured from stopping cuts.
Modern olympic blades, which the rule was written for, have a completely different behaviour.
Could check with Gus or Scotty if you don't believe me.
|
|
Prudence. Temperance. Fortitude. Justice. |
|
|
welder
Provost
Posts:95
|
| 07/23/2006 10:30 AM |
Alert
|
Can someone cite the section number(s) of this rule? I can't seem to find the original reference on the PDFs?
My main concern is that no one be allowed to actually fight with an S-curved blade; I'm not so sanguine about broken blades, myself. Whether disallowed blades are repaired or trashed is, as you say, not so important as it once was.
-William |
|
|
|
|
Raoul
Has a lot to say...
Posts:268
|
| 07/23/2006 10:55 AM |
Alert
|
In the current RABC its 4.3.3.1. Its been removed from the current darft set.
In the current Society rules its under WEAPONS AND PARRYING DEVICES, section 4.b.vi |
|
"So let us go and get killed where we are told to go. Is life worth the trouble of so many questions?" -Athos |
|
|
welder
Provost
Posts:95
|
| 07/23/2006 12:20 PM |
Alert
|
Ah, the section with the big picture of an s-curved blade. I am officially an idiot.
Actually, I'm a little surprised to see that the current rules allow a single curve "in any 12" length". Doesn't this mean, technically, that a 36+" blade could have two, or even three, opposing curves over its length and still be legal under the old rules? Woof. |
|
|
|
|
jgreywolf
Hai Gioco?
Posts:680
|
| 07/23/2006 10:05 PM |
Alert
|
Yes, William, it could be taken to mean exactly as you have stated.
With the majority of simulators that are available now, I would be concerned with ANY curve, to be honest. Of the "heavy rapier" simulators (besides Schlagers), I have personlly not seen any blades that should need a bend, or one that even developed a bend - except for some older blades which should be replaced anyways - as age does have a tendency to change the effectiveness involved in such things. |
|
Justin Greywolf (SCA: Ramon Diaz de la Vega)
Director
Old World Martial Arts - Teaching Historical Italian Swordplay in the Pacific Northwest |
|
|
Luciano
Provost
Posts:140
|
| 08/17/2006 5:00 PM |
Alert
|
I disagree with the new rule, on page 12: 4.5. Simulators with "S" curves must be retired .
If a blade has a gentle curve or two, it's still usable and safe.
Any blade with a single big curve is more likely to break than one with two gentle curves.
I think that the rules should be that any blade that develops a large curve should be retired, and that gentle curves shouldn't be worried about.
Luciano
|
|
|
|
|
jgreywolf
Hai Gioco?
Posts:680
|
| 08/19/2006 12:16 AM |
Alert
|
What is your definition of a "gentle" curve? While I would agree with you on something like a schlaeger - I am not so sure that I agree (off the top of my head) with this in regards to a heavier blade. If I see a Gus blade with a curve in it, I am more likely to be a bit concerned - because it shouldnt have one...
|
|
Justin Greywolf (SCA: Ramon Diaz de la Vega)
Director
Old World Martial Arts - Teaching Historical Italian Swordplay in the Pacific Northwest |
|
|
Luciano
Provost
Posts:140
|
| 08/21/2006 12:24 PM |
Alert
|
I've seen blades come from the manufacture with a curve in them.
As for my definition of a gentle curve, the two on my Bated Del Tin would qualify, which has been that way for several years.
If society has removed the restriction, I don't see the point of us adding it back in. It's not like we've had a problem with blade breakage because of it, or really much blade breakage at all.
Luciano |
|
|
|
|