[Regia-NA] The Nasal: What's it for?

[Nicholson, Andrew]

> I think that perhaps there might have been a thought that 
> nasals could be done away with for similar reasons, to make the helmet 
> lighter and easier to see out of.  Practical experimetation (or the theory
of 
> evolution) showed that the gains were less than the risks, and the nasal
was 
> adoped.  

As some folk are aware, my wife complained that my old helmet was looking
scabbier than some of my peasants ;)  -  it had, after all, done some 16
years of service - and that someone of my status should have a better one.
Me, I come from the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" school of kit. The
sheer quantity of dents and hammered-out creases proved it was a good
helmet, despite its age. 

Two years ago I bowed to pressure (or, to be more precise, mindful of the
advice above I was tempted at York by a right helmet at the right price) and
acquired a new bonce protector. This one has no nasal.

I can confirm that over the last couple of years I have had more facial
injuries/bruises/grazes when wearing the new helm than when wearing the old
one (and no, it's not that I'm getting more sloppy in combat, or slowing
down). Of course, one has to allow for the form in which we depict combat
(i.e. no deliberate shots at the face or head), and accept that this may not
reflect 'real life' usage.

Guðrum


--
This e-mail is communicated in confidence.
It is intended for the recipient only and may
not be disclosed further without the express
consent of the sender.