Author Topic: Fast Flight on warbow  (Read 29257 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ratty

  • Member
  • Posts: 55
Re: Fast Flight on warbow
« Reply #15 on: June 01, 2009, 11:02:09 am »
Folks used to say that fastflight was a breaker of wooden bows because it stretched less than a Dacron or linen string.

Well, it does stretch a little less than Dacron, but it's real advantage performance-wise is that fastflight weighs less.
And to be honest the only bows that I have ever seen broken with a fastflight string on them were either radically overstressed or weak in construction.
They probably would have broken sooner or later whatever the string was made from.

Making a fastflight string overbuilt would in fact probably be safer inasmuch as the increased string mass would slow the bow down.
You might just as well say that shooting a heavier arrow will break the bow.

I have an old boo backed laminated target bow 56lb @ 30"(now honourably retired) that has shot a 15 strand fastflight string it's whole competitive life in NFAS, BLBS, EFAA and GNAS.
It has often been criticised by folks with fancier bows for it's 3 inches of unbraced string follow which arose from the boo overpowering the belly from day one, but these same folks have more than once then had the doubtful privilege of seeing this same bow finish in the medals whilst their "superior" bows were in the also ran category.

This bow has also survived the scary experience of a few days experimentally shooting flight arrows with a 6 strand fastflight string, something quite painful on the fingers and making a sound so strained and high pitched that it will not soon be forgotten.

The only reason I use 15 strands is that it gives me a perfect nock fit when served and I figure if I had one on a heavy bow, this and comfort in the draw might be the deciding factor for me in a choosing string thickness, unless I wanted to optimise the string mass by reducing it so as to maximise the cast.

I also use fastflight on a short osage recurve and have had no problems, although my drawlength with this short bow did cause the original  Fullerplast varnish to check repeatededly in horizontal lines all along the whole length of the working limb on both back and belly.
This was made tidy by carefully sanding off the offending surface coat of varnish and rubbing the bow with emulsified beeswax.

The original horn overlays both popped off under the pressure of the string at different times, having been fixed in place with an unspecified superglue.
When reattached with Warn system epoxy no further problems were experienced.

What did surprise me was how well the fastflight held a properly made and waxed bowyers hitch, something I had been assured was not likely.

In conclusion, I guess I would have no worries about using fastflight on a sound well tillered bow, though I might make the string fat enough for comfort but light enough for durability on a heavier bow.

But I guess that I wouldn't feel right with fast flight on a single stave yew....

FWIW

Rod.

hello rod :)

ive hered this a few times now and it seems to be becoming excepted that linen stretches?

in my experience linen doesn't stretch, only as much as settling and fibers tightening in the twist from the making stage and when the string is first fitted.

d75 stretches and then retracts
fastflight + is exactly the same
and b50 is like knicker elastic ;)

this is alot easier to notice when shooting bows 130# +  but not noticable on bows around 60#

real original fast flight is the way to go for performance, but i can't get any at a reasonable price.

so i use D75 with as little strands as i dare to keep the stretch and not allow it to retract and with serving to thicken at the nock

oh also d75 and fastflight plus also stretch more in the heat where as linen will not.

i hope this helps :)


ps. ive edited this post 7 times sorry :D
« Last Edit: July 09, 2009, 02:25:42 pm by ratty »

Offline Davepim

  • Member
  • Posts: 86
Re: Fast Flight on warbow
« Reply #16 on: June 01, 2009, 11:58:22 am »
Hi Simon,
    I am really happy to read your observations on fastflight plus - this is exactly what I see with my strings; some people have told me it's my imagination! I don't know whether it's true, but, someone told me that Angel Dyneema was the same material as the original fastflight - could be worth a try!

Cheers, Dave

Yewboy

  • Guest
Re: Fast Flight on warbow
« Reply #17 on: June 01, 2009, 04:41:48 pm »
The record was set at around 430 yds but this was not a recorded world flight record

The actual distance was recorded at 438yds, shot by Alistair Aston, this is an official record with the EWBS and a world record, just because it wasn't shot at a FITA event doesn't mean it isn't official. It was measured with laser range finders by Mark Stretton and the bow was checked by both Mark Stretton and Steve Stratton, both commitee oficials within the EWBS, this shot was witnessed by over 50 other archers from around Europe

Offline markinengland

  • Member
  • Posts: 698
Re: Fast Flight on warbow
« Reply #18 on: June 01, 2009, 05:11:26 pm »
The 438 yards would have been more if a tree had not got in the way! Even if it is not an official FITA record it was shot and shows how well a longbow can shoot. It was also amazing to see how far the heavy war shafts were shot as well.
Rod, there is a very real difference between the effect of a heavy arrow and and a very strong non-stretch string. Basically opposite effects. A heavy arrow will be efficient and take most of the energy out of the bow leaving relatively little to be absorbed by the bow or string. A light arrow on the other hand may leave the bow fast but is relatively inefficient in terms of energy transfer leaving more energy in the bow/string. Whatever energy is left after the arrow leaves the bow stays in the system and must be absorbed by the bow and string. If the string can stretch a little some is absorbed by the string. If it doesn't that energy is absorbed by the bow limbs. If shooting light arrows from heavy bows with too overbuilt a continous loop string without energy absorbing twist you approach a dry fire situation in a worst case scenario.
Some people advise using a flemish twist string because this does allow an overbuilt string to stretch due to the twist. This would appear to be an acceptable and sensible compromise. FF materials can be used, strings can be overbuilt but it seems to me that it may be best to design our strings to work well and safely.  Some flight archers are prepared to risk the bow for the record shot, but some want a compromise of performance and durability. If the string is too narrow for the arrow nock it is easy to build the string up locally to fit the nock.

Offline Yeomanbowman

  • Member
  • Posts: 283
    • warbowwales
Re: Fast Flight on warbow
« Reply #19 on: June 01, 2009, 06:57:49 pm »
The record was set at around 430 yds but this was not a recorded world flight record

The actual distance was recorded at 438yds, shot by Alistair Aston, this is an official record with the EWBS and a world record, just because it wasn't shot at a FITA event doesn't mean it isn't official. It was measured with laser range finders by Mark Stretton and the bow was checked by both Mark Stretton and Steve Stratton, both commitee oficials within the EWBS, this shot was witnessed by over 50 other archers from around Europe

Well said Yew Boy.

Offline backgardenbowyer

  • Member
  • Posts: 130
Re: Fast Flight on warbow
« Reply #20 on: June 01, 2009, 07:47:06 pm »
I was at Batsford too - 438yds it was and stopped by a tree.  We will need a bigger field!  As to official records I've no idea what the rules are but there were plenty of witnesses to this shot.  I didn't however get to see the bow or the arrow Alistair used - was it laminated or a self bow, does anyone know?

Stan

Offline Marc St Louis

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • Posts: 7,869
  • Keep it flexible
    • Marc's Bows and Arrows
Re: Fast Flight on warbow
« Reply #21 on: June 01, 2009, 09:18:25 pm »
I couldn't remember the exact distance and even though it was witnessed by many I doubt that it will stand as a world record with fita, although I don't see why not
Home of heat-treating, Corbeil, On.  Canada

Marc@Ironwoodbowyer.com

Offline Yeomanbowman

  • Member
  • Posts: 283
    • warbowwales
Re: Fast Flight on warbow
« Reply #22 on: June 02, 2009, 10:42:12 am »
I couldn't remember the exact distance and even though it was witnessed by many I doubt that it will stand as a world record with fita, although I don't see why not

Marc,

We are not saying it should be a FITA record, clearly it isn't as it was not at a FITA event, but what we are saying is it is an EWBS World Record that (as far as I am concerned) is every bit it's equal.  The standard of EWBS distance shooting is world class and I can think of only one British archer, not in the organisation, who'd stand a chance of bettering it's best.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2009, 06:20:10 pm by Yeomanbowman »

Rod

  • Guest
Re: Fast Flight on warbow
« Reply #23 on: June 02, 2009, 10:54:50 am »
Rod, there is a very real difference between the effect of a heavy arrow and and a very strong non-stretch string. Basically opposite effects. A heavy arrow will be efficient and take most of the energy out of the bow leaving relatively little to be absorbed by the bow or string. A light arrow on the other hand may leave the bow fast but is relatively inefficient in terms of energy transfer leaving more energy in the bow/string. Whatever energy is left after the arrow leaves the bow stays in the system and must be absorbed by the bow and string. If the string can stretch a little some is absorbed by the string. If it doesn't that energy is absorbed by the bow limbs. If shooting light arrows from heavy bows with too overbuilt a continous loop string without energy absorbing twist you approach a dry fire situation in a worst case scenario.

Mark,
I am aware of the principles involved.
I only observed that both a heavier shaft and a heavier string can produce a lower speed than a lighter shaft or lighter string (within certain  limits in relationship to dry fire speed and with all else being equal).
And as I have already mentioned, it is a fallacy that fastflight is a "non-stretch" string.

Ratty,
I made no such assumption about linen, but mentioned a commonly held opinion which I personally do not subscribe to.
But thank you for the clarification, which I do agree with.

Rod.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2009, 10:59:48 am by Rod »

Rod

  • Guest
Re: Fast Flight on warbow
« Reply #24 on: June 02, 2009, 11:39:35 am »
The record was set at around 430 yds but this was not a recorded world flight record

The actual distance was recorded at 438yds, shot by Alistair Aston, this is an official record with the EWBS and a world record, just because it wasn't shot at a FITA event doesn't mean it isn't official. It was measured with laser range finders by Mark Stretton and the bow was checked by both Mark Stretton and Steve Stratton, both commitee oficials within the EWBS, this shot was witnessed by over 50 other archers from around Europe

I suppose that this comes down to a difference of opinion about what constitutes an internationally recognised World Record as opposed to an EWBS World Record.

I think it sufficient that it is an EWBS Record that surpasses anything done in the same class under FITA rules.
Like Bert Smith's BLBS record for the Clout, it stands upon it's own merit.

Equally one could make a case that World Record status is generally held to be within the purview of FITA.

Just let me say that I would not like to see bickering here about spheres of authority in such a matter, even though I have long held the opinion that matters pertaining to the English bow are no business of FITA or any other foreign or internatiional organisation.

I must admit, to my shame that I once shot a FITA round with the longbow at County level, but only after the distance had been converted into Imperial measure to the nearest 16th of an inch by a judge with a sense of humour, since I refused to shoot a metric distance as a matter of principle.

The fact remains however that as things stand, to gain "official" international recognition a World Record might be worth repeating in FITA flight competition, if that is what you wish.

Rod.




Offline bow-toxo

  • Member
  • Posts: 337
Re: Fast Flight on warbow
« Reply #25 on: June 17, 2009, 11:37:00 pm »

I agree with you adb, I always use a string that has more strands than necessary, simply to feel thick enough. I have always used fastflight or fastflight plus - never seen any problems. Linen and hemp also have virtually no stretch or elasticity.
Cheers, Dave
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apparently you folks no longer serve your strings, the traditional way to increase finger comfort and get a proper fit for the arrow nock as well as preventing wear on the string without increasing the total thickness of the string which was thought to reduce cast.

Offline Davepim

  • Member
  • Posts: 86
Re: Fast Flight on warbow
« Reply #26 on: June 18, 2009, 04:28:16 am »

I agree with you adb, I always use a string that has more strands than necessary, simply to feel thick enough. I have always used fastflight or fastflight plus - never seen any problems. Linen and hemp also have virtually no stretch or elasticity.
Cheers, Dave
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apparently you folks no longer serve your strings, the traditional way to increase finger comfort and get a proper fit for the arrow nock as well as preventing wear on the string without increasing the total thickness of the string which was thought to reduce cast.

I always serve the string. How can you shoot with an unserved string? The strands will start to separate and wear through! When I serve a string the serving compresses the strands to a tight cylinder that is, on the whole, thinner than the unserved string; the only solution is to add extra strands just at that point or to have a thicker overall string. If you force me to be blunt about it, I'd say that by making strings thinner (by use of modern materials) than the originals would have been, we are gaining an advantage in bow performance that would have been unavailable to archers 500 years ago! If we want to keep bow performance roughly equivalent to what it would have been with a medieval bow, whilst still using modern materials, then we need to make strings thicker, even if this results in a loss of arrow cast.

Dave

Offline bow-toxo

  • Member
  • Posts: 337
Re: Fast Flight on warbow
« Reply #27 on: June 18, 2009, 06:20:23 pm »

I agree with you adb, I always use a string that has more strands than necessary, simply to feel thick enough. I have always used fastflight or fastflight plus - never seen any problems. Linen and hemp also have virtually no stretch or elasticity.
Cheers, Dave
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apparently you folks no longer serve your strings, the traditional way to increase finger comfort and get a proper fit for the arrow nock as well as preventing wear on the string without increasing the total thickness of the string which was thought to reduce cast.

I always serve the string. How can you shoot with an unserved string? The strands will start to separate and wear through! When I serve a string the serving compresses the strands to a tight cylinder that is, on the whole, thinner than the unserved string; the only solution is to add extra strands just at that point or to have a thicker overall string. If you force me to be blunt about it, I'd say that by making strings thinner (by use of modern materials) than the originals would have been, we are gaining an advantage in bow performance that would have been unavailable to archers 500 years ago! If we want to keep bow performance roughly equivalent to what it would have been with a medieval bow, whilst still using modern materials, then we need to make strings thicker, even if this results in a loss of arrow cast.

Dave

    Sorry, I mistakenly understood that you were making the whole string thicker for finger comfort. To have a string the thickness of those on the MR bows, it would be a 1/8" thick at the serving  if the width of MR arrow nocks has been correctly reported. Isn't that pretty much the thickness of bowstrings on more modern longbows and worldwide bows in general ? Also, archers of  500  years ago already had access to silk strings. The Book of Roi Modus states;" it will drive an arrow or bolt farther, and strike a heavier blow than any string made of flax or hemp: because it can be made of whatever strength and thickness the shooter pleaseth", so maybe you could have a thinner string in good conscience.

Offline Davepim

  • Member
  • Posts: 86
Re: Fast Flight on warbow
« Reply #28 on: June 19, 2009, 05:00:37 am »
Quite so Bow-toxo, quite so. It is indeed possible that some of the the strings aboard the Mary Rose were silk and therefore thinner, but built up under the serving at the nocking point - we only have the internal width of the arrow nocks to guide us. I believe that something resembling a (linen?) bow string was found but its construction was unidentifiable due to degradation. I do not build up the centre of my fastflight strings, I merely use a thicker string for the draw weight of my bows than most people consider necessary, for the reasons that I've already stated, assuming most strings were originally hemp or linen and therefore thicker than we are accustomed to.

Dave

Rod

  • Guest
Re: Fast Flight on warbow
« Reply #29 on: June 23, 2009, 10:44:56 am »
Thick strings are not uncommon in primitive styles of bow where either the materials dictate or where cast is not the deciding factor.
Every culture makes it's own choice within the context of common usage.
One way of dealing with finger discomfort is to make a thicker string, but being aware of the trade-off involved.

I use serving to protect the string and if necessary to make a minor adjustment to nock fit.
The string is made intially to fit the standard nock when served.

With a self nock, it can be cut to be slightly tight and each shaft then finessed to give best fit when worn in through repeated shooting.
On an unused shaft I prefer a slightly stiff fit.
If one gets too loose through heavy use I sometimes line the nock with a layer of glued on tissue paper.

Rod.