Necessary terms

Hal Jordan · Post by **Hal Jordan** » Fri Jan 20, 2012 3:19 am

Magnus - you are correct. The term "mechanical advantage" has a specific meaning and I've used it incorrectly.

VR (Velocity Ratio) is a term I'm not familiar with, so probably best if someone else tries to explain it...

Paul Arden · Post by **Paul Arden** » Fri Jan 20, 2012 9:38 am

What is SHO? Simple Harmonic Oscillator?

Stoatstail50 · Post by **Stoatstail50** » Fri Jan 20, 2012 10:05 am

Paul Arden · Post by **Paul Arden** » Fri Jan 20, 2012 11:03 am

Cool.

victor · Post by **victor** » Fri Jan 20, 2012 1:51 pm

F = ma

To really understand that you need to understand Newton's laws and understand that F and a are vector quantities and what that means.

Hooray, I thought, at last I might start to understand what everyone else is talking about but within one sentance I am F*****. What are vectors and what are vector quantities?

I like the idea of creating a list words, like vector, and then someone writing an idiots guide explaining it's relationship to fly casting.

I have been the village idiot on here long enough.

Mike

Stoatstail50 · Post by **Stoatstail50** » Fri Jan 20, 2012 4:03 pm

A Vector or a Vector Quantity is something with size and a direction.

Line Velocity, is a vector, basically, its size is measured by how fast it is going and in what direction it is going.
We commonly use "linespeed" to mean the same thing, not strictly accurate but everyone will know what you mean.

Acceleration is a vector because it is measuring changes in Velocities.

Force vectors are the size of the force and the direction in which it is being applied.

Mass is not a vector.....it is scalar, that is, it has magnitude but no direction.

Walters weight/mass thing is because Weight is Mass times the effect of gravity here where we are on planet earth. Neil Armstrong weighed less on the moon because the gravity is different, his mass was the same. Weight is a vector quantity because the force of gravity is acting downwards on the mass ie. it has a direction.

When Magnus was talking about the Mass differences between rods in the bendy rod thread he is just saying that you have to use more energy to move a heavy rod than a light one. This would be true here or on the moon, even though the weights would change, the relative difference would stay the same because their mass is realtively different.

Magnus · Post by **Magnus** » Fri Jan 20, 2012 4:33 pm

I think we use mass and weight to imply Moment of Inertia too - that's about distribution of mass. So, two rod which weigh the same can have utterly different MOI (or Swingweight.)
When we rotate rods it's the MOI which determines the energy we need to use to move the rod not the mass.

I think

Merlin · Post by **Merlin** » Fri Jan 20, 2012 7:15 pm

Correct Magnus

Mark, Paul & Walter

Well, I thought some of you were looking for something simple and useful to instructors… So you think speaking about hand casting is a good introduction to fly casting? It could be if you want to illustrate the relationship between energy and force moved along a (straight) path. Or opening a discussion about the three Newton’s laws? You will get everybody lost there.

I agree on the loop aspect of the cast, it can be incorporated but I repeat my question: what are the hottest topics in the exam about understanding the fly cast? How are those questions spelled out?

Try to write a story for yourself and you shall see that listing words does to go very far, I believe, especially if you ban technical words from the text.

Mechanical advantage / velocity ratio: do you speak of the relative importance of maximum tip speed versus maximum “rigid rod” rotation speed? You refer to what is illustrated by James in another thread?

Merlin

Stoatstail50 · Post by **Stoatstail50** » Fri Jan 20, 2012 9:14 pm

I'm going to give up on this one too...

Morsie · Post by **Morsie** » Wed Jan 25, 2012 10:39 am

QUOTE
Maybe engineers should invent an exam to see if instructors do understand fly casting mechanics (ooops, another big provocation!)

Merlin
Not a provocation at all, I know several people who would sign up to that tomorrow....I would.

What is at issue is how you are going to educate non-engineers to pass it. This involves explaining potentially complex concepts simply and accurately.

This is exactly what I would like.

I think its a great idea as well, then we could do something in return for the engineers that involved actually fishing, or would that be too controversial and wacky.

Morsie

Bernd · Post by **Bernd** » Wed Jan 25, 2012 2:13 pm

I like to use hand casting to visualize why we need a fly rod to have a much better efficiency in all three main fields of fly casting:
1. Forming a good loop matching the situation I am in.
2. Creating proper line speed for the length of line and matching with the whole situation.
3. Adjusting trajectory to the target.

Without a rod I would be f... in most situations.

Hand casting leaves an exhausted caster mostly within a few casts

. Only for straight casts this is already.

Fly casting to me is learning how to use the rod most efficently to achieve:
Proper loop, proper line speed and proper trajectory to finally hit the target.

I'd like to see someone hand casting up to 80 feet for more than 20 casts

.

Greets
Bernd

Lasse Karlsson · Post by **Lasse Karlsson** » Wed Jan 25, 2012 5:02 pm

Bernd wrote:Hand casting leaves an exhausted caster mostly within a few casts . Only for straight casts this is already.

I'd like to see someone hand casting up to 80 feet for more than 20 casts .

Greets
Bernd

Hi Bernd

Most casters are exhausetd after a few casts even with a rod

What would be the equivalent distance with a 9 foot rod? I'd hazard a guess at 14-150 feet, I'd like to see a caster do that in 20 casts without using heavy shootingheads...

Cheers
Lasse

Bernd · Post by **Bernd** » Thu Jan 26, 2012 4:19 pm

Hi Lasse,
what's the point here?
Are you saying we don't need the rod for efficient fly casting?

I know a lot of fly fisherman who can fish for hours without getting tired at all. Pretty sure you are just one of them

.
Without a rod it would be different.

However I understand the fly rod to be a very effective tool to add speed and direction (velocity) to my line.

Thanks
Bernd

Lasse Karlsson · Post by **Lasse Karlsson** » Thu Jan 26, 2012 8:48 pm

Bernd wrote:Hi Lasse,
what's the point here?
Are you saying we don't need the rod for efficient fly casting?

I know a lot of fly fisherman who can fish for hours without getting tired at all. Pretty sure you are just one of them .
Without a rod it would be different.

However I understand the fly rod to be a very effective tool to add speed and direction (velocity) to my line.

Thanks
Bernd

Hi Bernd

The point being that you're using a faulty analogie

What fishermen do you know that can fish for hours at 140-150 feet without getting tired? I'm not in that league, hell no

Fact is, I can fish for hours without a rod, casting a reasonable distance with a flyline, and not get tired. I'd still rather use the advantage a flexible lever gives me almost any day.

Cheers
Lasse

Bernd · Post by **Bernd** » Thu Jan 26, 2012 9:01 pm

Hi Lasse,
so you are saying casting the same percentage of each distance spectrum (with and without a fly rod) will mean the same effort?
If so, my experience is completely different.

I remember me and Paul having a little shootout in hand casting last summer. Just a few casts and we both were tired.
Casting with the rod we did it all day long. And yes we were tired late at night, but that was the gin!
Greets
Bernd

The Archived Board

The Archived Board

Necessary terms

Who is online