Question:

"Peter Duniho"  wrote Look at the crew count.  Even with a small passenger list, a 737 is probably not going to take off with just one flight attendant.  Every flight I’ve been on, on a plane that size, they’ve had at least two flight attendants, just because the first class passengers want one all to themselves.

The number of seats (not passengers) determines the minimium required Flight Attendants.  One FA for each 50 seats or portion thereof. Bob

Response:

The number of seats (not passengers) determines the minimium required Flight Attendants.  One FA for each 50 seats or portion thereof.

The smallest (least number of seats) airplane the mainline United flies is the a 737 with a configuration of 104 passegner seats.   Three flight attendents are therefore assigned. The Dornier 328 is the smallest jet used by the United Express carriers (at about 32 seats, quite an intersting plane by the way).  The propstreams are the smallest at about 29 seats (perhaps one of my least favorite airlinesr).

Response:

The number of seats (not passengers) determines the minimium required Flight Attendants.  One FA for each 50 seats or portion thereof.

Thank you.  My point exactly.

Response:

Several years back, we and another pilot couple were camped on the beach next to a runway on a tiny little island in the Bahamas.  No services, small fishing village, a couple of "yacht club" places which served food to boaters passing through. What island was this?

Farmer’s Cay. Very nice but haven’t been back since a hurricane went through. Sydney

Response:

Definitely doesn’t sound like a 737/DC-9 or larger. Mighta been a bad day.   Been on one international flight (Finnair) where coincidentally there were more cabin staff than pax.  It was great! That accounts for the 19 passengers, but United doesn’t fly anything that only has 3 crewmembers (remember to count the flight attendents).

Quite right – I missed that Even a 737 gets two pilots and (I’m pretty sure) three flight attendents.

Yeah – as someone pointed out, the ratio is one per 50 seats – in the US and most other places, I gather.   Here in Oz it’s presently 1 per 35, but the airlines are starting to agitate to get it increased to 1 to 50 while the FAs are resisting (naturally), pointing out that elderly and kids require considerably more attention than healthy adults, etc, etc.. IMO in an accident the more trained FAs available the better!

Response:

The first FA is required at 20 seats, that’s why all those Metroliners have 19 seats. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The number of seats (not passengers) determines the minimium required Flight Attendants.  One FA for each 50 seats or portion thereof. Thank you.  My point exactly.

Response:

the better!

It certainly increases the odds of not getting slam-clickers on a RON. However, in a serious situation, some well-trained F/As freak out in a panic and are useless. Until they experience a real emergency, they are untested and an unknown quantity. D.

Response:

the better! It certainly increases the odds of not getting slam-clickers on a RON.

However, in a serious situation, some well-trained F/As freak out in a panic and are useless. Until they experience a real emergency, they are untested and an unknown quantity.

True – but at least they have had the training.

Response:

the better! It certainly increases the odds of not getting slam-clickers on a RON. However, in a serious situation, some well-trained F/As freak out in a panic and are useless. Until they experience a real emergency, they are untested and an unknown quantity.

The same can be said about some pilots.

Response:

the better! It certainly increases the odds of not getting slam-clickers on a RON. However, in a serious situation, some well-trained F/As freak out in a panic and are useless. Until they experience a real emergency, they are untested and an unknown quantity. D.

Same with captains, Captain!

Response:

It certainly increases the odds of not getting slam-clickers on a RON. However, in a serious situation, some well-trained F/As freak out in a  panic and are useless. Until they experience a real emergency, they are untested and an unknown quantity. Same with captains, Captain!

Same with any other member of the flight crew (Cap’t FO FE). Until the chips are down and the fit hits the shan we’re all untested unknown quantities. Cheers, Sydney

Response:

Definitely doesn’t sound like a 737/DC-9 or larger. Mighta been a bad day.   Been on one international flight (Finnair) where coincidentally there were more cabin staff than pax.  It was great!

That accounts for the 19 passengers, but United doesn’t fly anything that only has 3 crewmembers (remember to count the flight attendents). Even a 737 gets two pilots and (I’m pretty sure) three flight attendents.

Response:

Several years back, we and another pilot couple were camped on the beach next to a runway on a tiny little island in the Bahamas.  No services, small fishing village, a couple of "yacht club" places which served food to boaters passing through.

What island was this?

Response:

Mighta been a bad day.   Been on one international flight (Finnair) where coincidentally there were more cabin staff than pax.

Look at the crew count.  Even with a small passenger list, a 737 is probably not going to take off with just one flight attendant.  Every flight I’ve been on, on a plane that size, they’ve had at least two flight attendants, just because the first class passengers want one all to themselves. Pete

Response:

To my knowledge, only mainline United uses the United callsign. Commuter turboprops use the callsigns assigned to their company’s certificate. You are, of course, correct (AFAIK) about the callsign.  I think though, that the main point was identifying the type of plane as the kind typically used for commuter flights.  Three crew and 19 passengers does seem to indicate some sort of smaller aircraft, whether it’s a turboprop, Jetstream, or what have you. Definitely doesn’t sound like a 737/DC-9 or larger.

Mighta been a bad day.   Been on one international flight (Finnair) where coincidentally there were more cabin staff than pax.  It was great!

Response:

I’d imagine that for the typical airline customer, having to make an early landing due to an engine failure would be a pretty traumatic event.  Not the sort of thing that would go unremarked.

I don’t know. Several years back, we and another pilot couple were camped on the beach next to a runway on a tiny little island in the Bahamas.  No services, small fishing village, a couple of "yacht club" places which served food to boaters passing through. The next morning, several trucks pulled up and a bunch of typical middle-aged well-to-do people with lots o’ luggage got out.  We started chatting.  Seems they were there buying property with the notion of developing a resort, and were awaiting a charter flight out.  They seemed like typical, risk-averse, average airline customers. Their mount arrived, and I do mean "arrived".  A C310.  Got blown off the rwy centerline into the shrubby trees on short final, landed with vegetation dangling from the landing gear and the L main fuel tank (tip tank) trailing fuel through a gap around the smashed nav lights. The captain, a distinguished-looking silver haired gentleman, got out and surveyed the shrubbery.  Next thing I knew, the pax were cheerfully loading up their luggage and climbing aboard.  The fact that their pilot had just hit a tree, that the plane was streaming fuel from one of its main tanks, that the undercarriage may have been damaged, might not retract, and once retracted might not extend, meant nothing to them. Pilot was willing to fly, must be safe, they were rarin’ to go. And go they did, using every inch of runway (it was pretty short for a C310).  Between the luggage and the 6 of ‘em I doubt they were under gross.  Maybe over.  Godspeed! I think most people’s risk assessment is so skewed that they’re very fearful if the plane is delayed while a gauge or a light is repaired, but loss or damage to big important parts like engines and main fuel tanks might not bother them much more. Cheers, Sydney

Response:

In article 1:25 PM PDT, as I was over Malibu monitoring SoCal frequency heard United fight ask to return to LAX. I suspect this was a computer plane, probably turbo prop, To my knowledge, only mainline United uses the United callsign. Commuter turboprops use the callsigns assigned to their company’s certificate.

Yep.  I hadn’t thought of that before.  I was too busy thinking about shoes…or fish. In LA, had it been a United code share commuter, the callsign would more likely have been SkyWest, unless Mesa is still in the area, in which case it would have been Air Shuttle.  If the callsign was United, then it really was United.

Response:

To my knowledge, only mainline United uses the United callsign. Commuter turboprops use the callsigns assigned to their company’s certificate.

You are, of course, correct (AFAIK) about the callsign.  I think though, that the main point was identifying the type of plane as the kind typically used for commuter flights.  Three crew and 19 passengers does seem to indicate some sort of smaller aircraft, whether it’s a turboprop, Jetstream, or what have you. Definitely doesn’t sound like a 737/DC-9 or larger. Pete

Response:

I was on a United 737 that had an engine quit.  Total non-event.  Returned to O’Hare and got on another flight.  Guess that’s why they have two engines.  Media doesn’t care unless there is blood and guts.

Many years ago I was on a TWA 747 that lost an engine on climb-out from Logan, with a loud bang. We turned back and landed with the trucks chasing us, but we made a normal egress. Nothing in the press. It seemed to me at the time that they idled the other three engines for a while (so we were, basically, gliding over Boston Harbor). I may have been mistaken, being busy comforting the children. Is that part of the attempted restart procedure? (aftermath: TWA found another 747 at JFK and flew it up to BOS, opened a door to let the meals in, and the escape chute fell out. Oh, damn, now we can’t use that door, where are we going to find a 747 door this time of night? Oh look, there’s another one over there with a bad engine but a perfectly good door… eventually the 6pm flight left at 2am but kudos to TWA; they put a lot of effort into not canceling the flight).

Response:

1:25 PM PDT, as I was over Malibu monitoring SoCal frequency heard United fight ask to return to LAX. I suspect this was a computer plane, probably turbo prop,

To my knowledge, only mainline United uses the United callsign. Commuter turboprops use the callsigns assigned to their company’s certificate. D.

Response:

While en route Fullerton to Oxnard today about 1:25 PM PDT, as I was over Malibu monitoring SoCal frequency heard United fight ask to return to LAX. Controller asked if they were declaring an emergency and reply was "yes, lost an engine."  Controller then asked how many soles on board, reply "19 with three crew." I suspect this was a computer plane, probably turbo prop, and LAX was probably 95-100 degrees at the time.  I had to change frequencies so never heard end result.  Nothing on news or on Internet that I can find.  Anyone know anything about it?  Perhaps this happens more often then we ever hear about… Scott

I was on a United 737 that had an engine quit.  Total non-event.  Returned to O’Hare and got on another flight.  Guess that’s why they have two engines.  Media doesn’t care unless there is blood and guts.

Response:

[...] Controller then asked how many soles on board, reply "19 with three crew." Well, the one-armed man may still be missing, but at least we’ve found the one-legged man.

Hah! Thanks for that. Now I can sleep! — Jeff Cook http://www.cookstudios.com Video Editing, Avid Training & Web Design Based in Washington DC

Response:

Sorry for not actually knowing anything pertinent to your comments.  :)  I doubt that an engine failure on a commercial flight happens a lot more than we hear about, since even if the news doesn’t pick up on it right away, almost always one of the passengers would eventually get around to saying something. I’d imagine that for the typical airline customer, having to make an early landing due to an engine failure would be a pretty traumatic event.  Not the sort of thing that would go unremarked.

Incidents might happen more than we think, although I also think that engine failures are rather rare. I know of one occasion where a colleague of mine was on board, the way he described the flight was a bird-strike in one of the engines, followed by a shutdown of that engine and a return to the airport. This never made it into the news. A friend of mine once, as a co-pilot, aborted a takeoff due to an engine problem, I did not read anything in the news about it either. And why would we, in these cases the crew apparently handled the situation properly, and actually nothing important happened. At the following link you can find incident descriptions involving Dutch aircraft, engine failures seem to be quite rare, but a return to the airport from where they came seems to happen every now and then: http://www.minvenw.nl/ivw/divisieluchtvaart/nla/veilig_mil/htm/incide… (Although the page is in Dutch, most of the actual incident descriptions are in English) Best regards, Peter

Response:

[...] Controller then asked how many soles on board, reply "19 with three crew."

Well, the one-armed man may still be missing, but at least we’ve found the one-legged man. I suspect this was a computer plane, probably turbo prop, and LAX was probably 95-100 degrees at the time.

As far as I know, all of United’s airplanes are real.  Not a single computer plane among the bunch. Sorry for not actually knowing anything pertinent to your comments.  :)  I doubt that an engine failure on a commercial flight happens a lot more than we hear about, since even if the news doesn’t pick up on it right away, almost always one of the passengers would eventually get around to saying something. I’d imagine that for the typical airline customer, having to make an early landing due to an engine failure would be a pretty traumatic event.  Not the sort of thing that would go unremarked. Pete

Response:

While en route Fullerton to Oxnard today about 1:25 PM PDT, as I was over Malibu monitoring SoCal frequency heard United fight ask to return to LAX. Controller asked if they were declaring an emergency and reply was "yes, lost an engine."  Controller then asked how many soles on board, reply "19 with three crew." I suspect this was a computer plane, probably turbo prop, and LAX was probably 95-100 degrees at the time.  I had to change frequencies so never heard end result.  Nothing on news or on Internet that I can find.  Anyone know anything about it?  Perhaps this happens more often then we ever hear about… Scott

Response:

Question:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hello Wilfred, glad you enjoyed the site.  To your question:    Shooting heads are actually nothing more than pieces of fly-line whose weight is matched as exactly as possible to the rod.  They are normally made by using a normal DT line, from one to two sizes heavier than the recommended line weight for the rod, and cutting this to a suitable length. Which line you choose to start with depends on the intended purpose of the finished head. Any given rod, including fly-rods, will cast best of all when loaded with a specific weight.  Shooting heads are based on this principle.  Once you find the "optimum" weight for your rod, then you can weigh the result, and any line of this actual weight may be cast well with this rod, or indeed even a piece of lead of the same weight. There are of course physical limitations to the length of line etc, but within fairly wide parameters the above holds true.  Again, within certain parameters, the length, diameter, and other line characteristics are quite immaterial, only the actual weight is important. "Ready made" shooting heads are not normally as good as the ones you make up yourself, as they rarely match the rod properly, which rather defeats the object of the exercise. In order to make up a shooting head for any particular rod, the procedure is as follows: Obtain a DT line one size heavier than the recommended line weight, ( if there are two numbers on your rod, i.e. #5/7 ) then use a number seven DT. It is immaterial whether one uses a floater or a sinker, or any other type of line, however, for your particular purpose, ( deep fishing ), a high density sinking line is the only really suitable choice to start with. Put this line on your rod, and then cast it normally without using any hauling etc.  Do not try to cast more than about forty feet maximum, as this may overload the rod, and even damage it.    When you are casting effortlessly and well, with say 30 to 40 feet of line outside the rod tip, ( this will vary considerably dependent on the rod used ), then take a marking pen, lay the rod down, and mark the line at the rod tip. You have just found the ideal line weight for your rod.   Cut the line at this point. Attach your backing line to where the line was cut, ( 20 LB flat nylon monofil, for instance, such as "amnesia", although normal monofil will also work, but has a tendency to tangle more) with a needle knot or similar, ( I prefer loops, see below). Now, using a double haul, ( the technique is described on my site ), you should be able to shoot a great deal of this backing without any trouble or effort at all.  With practice, even extreme distances may be reached. One hundred foot casts are no problem at all, and a great deal more may be reached with practice.  The technique is to lay out the backing on a level surface, or use a line tray or similar, aerialise the head, execute a double haul, and allow the backing to shoot. For your specific purpose, I would actually advise getting a DT line two sizes heavier than your rod recommendation. The procedure is then the same, but your shooting head will be a lot shorter, as the line is heavier to start with. Do not try to aerialise more than thirty feet of this line, it will damage your rod. A "short"  heavy head is more advantageous for deep fishing, as it sinks more rapidly, and also more uniformly.  This may mean that your "head" is only twenty -five feet long.  This is slightly more difficult to cast, but it is better for your purpose. One does have the advantage that one is constantly casting a piece of line of the same length and weight, and once this is learned, there is never any need to alter ones timing etc.  This is quite easy with a little practice. You do not say which flies you would like to use, but normally for this purpose, largish streamers and similar flies are used. The rig described will carry quite large heavy flies fairly easily. The trick now is to cast the line out, and start "counting down" in seconds, retrieve, when you get a take, then you know the fish are at this depth, and on subsequent casts you simply count the same number of seconds before starting your retrieve.   You do not of course know the actual depth you are fishing at, but this is not necessary, and it would do you little good to know it anyway. There are quite a few problems associated with very deep fly-fishing, not the least of which is finding the fish.  Large lakes and similar bodies of water invariably have what is known as a "thermocline" at some specific depth, which varies with the weather etc. This is a distinct separation line between relatively "warm" surface water, and relatively "cold" water.  The temperature difference may be quite considerable, and the fish may be on one side or the other of the thermocline,  if you are not fishing in the correct zone, you will catch nothing at all, a few inches deeper or higher, and you may get a bagfull. The "countdown" method allows you to find this depth fairly quickly. It is rarely necessary to fish even close to the bottom in such deep lakes, as there are very few fish there at all, if any.   Most of the deep lakes I fish in Summer, ( in Winter, there is no thermocline as such, for various physical reasons, this of course assumes that your "Winter" is cold ), generally have fish ( and large ones ! ) at between 25 and 50 feet, and these fish invariably feed on shoals of baitfish. On very large lakes, you can "trail" this rig behind the boat at slow speed, paying out backing to control the depth.  The more backing out, and the slower the speed, the deeper you fish.  This may help you to find the fish before you tire yourself out casting!  Use a larger reel than you normally would, with plenty of backing line. At the very least one hundred and fifty yards.  If you get hooked into a ten pounder or more it will give you a hell of a fight usually, and very long unstoppable runs are fairly typical of such fish. If you do not have enough backing, they will simply break you. The best flies are invariably streamers as I said, and you should use larger ones.  Most of my "standards" are at least three inches long, and sometimes larger. The leader you use can simply be a piece of normal monofil line, I invariably use a ten foot length of ten pound nylon.  "Turnover", and "presentation" are not factors in this type of fishing, in the sense that the "presentation" takes place under water at considerable depth, and any casting finesse on the surface is superfluous. This is not an elegant method of fishing, but it is extremely effective. If you find that even this rig gets down too slowly ( unlikely but possible ), then obtain a length of "lead core" line, follow the procedure described for making up a shooting head, but use the lead core line to do this. Only use a short piece of this to start casting with, and be careful, a whack in the back of the head from this stuff will quite possibly knock you out, and if it hits the rod it may shatter it.  This rig is a real pig to cast, as the timing is extremely critical, but it will get down deep and fast, and more and more people are using such rigs for fishing in deep water, especially in the ocean.  Personally I prefer the more "normal" high density sinker, as it is more pleasant to use. For fishing at depths in excess of say thirty or forty feet, there is no real alternative to a high density head, or lead core line.  You will doubtless be surprised at how long it takes such a line to sink as well.  If you want to try this, then simply cast out, and wait for the line to hit bottom.  You will feel this when it happens, the backing line will "go slack". If you want to increase your fishing depth, then after casting, pay out backing as required until you reach your previously determined "count down" depth. This also helps the line to sink in a more or less horizontal plane, and prevents the line hanging "straight down" under the boat, which makes for bad presentation. The fish you are attempting to imitate rarely swim vertically, and a horizontal presentation is invariably more succesfull. For "trailing " behind the boat ( this method is often called "trolling", which is however incorrect ), the lead core line may be superior, especially as casting is not then necessary. Just pay line out as required. To close, if you wish to experiment with shooting heads, then I would advise you to buy "mill ends" from the following address.  These are cheap, and of excellent quality, and one can make up a whole range of heads for various purposes for very little money.  I have used these for years.  You can make up two shooting heads from a DT line, and you can use the odd thirty feet which is left over from the middle for other experiments, or making up other custom lines, like sink tips, intermediates etc. I use "shooting heads" almost exclusively, for all my fishing, and I am very happy with them. I can change lines at will, simply by looping a new head onto my backing, even when "normal" trout stream fishing etc. I carry up to ten heads coiled in a wallet in my jacket pocket, and I can immediately react to any changes in water or weather etc, simply by looping on a new head Mullarkey & Sons 184-185 Waterloo Street, Burton-on-Trent, Staffs DE14 2NQ England You can pay by credit card, order by phone,  ( I believe they are working on a web-site as well )  the service is excellent, and many of the other products are worth taking a look at as well. Their phone number is  01283   566777  ask them to send you a catalogue. I have no connection with them by the

… read more »

Response:

Ooops !  This post was actually a mistake, it was a reply to an e-mail which I once again accidentally posted to ROFF.  Oh well never mind, if it was of any help to you. I am sure nobody will mind.   I will have to avoid posting when I am tired out in future. TL MC — "In order to know what is possible one must constantly attempt the impossible" http://www.mikeconnor.de Excellant Post – Very informative.  I have been cutting double tapered

lines

Response:

I used to cut double tapers in half for small stream fishing but quit when my son came back from the Lamar River in Yellowstone one Fall and complained about only having hip boots and 1/2 Double Taper Line. Seems the trout were feeding just out of reach and he thought I had endangered the family jewels. Ernie

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Excellant Post – Very informative.  I have been cutting double tapered lines in two for years, mostly because I am cheap and use only half a line most of the time anyway.   Your method of tuning the line is brilliant. This fall I will have a section of 10 weight on the old Ugly Stick up on the Ho. I use to have a size G-A "spinning taper"  ( made to fly fish with a spinning rod )  that I used on a nine weigh.  It  was 14′ long and worked very well but I haven’t seen one for years.  I have been using a weight forward line and never have been really thrilled with them. Thanks again   BJ Conner Hello Wilfred, Mike "In order to know what is possible one must constantly attempt the impossible" http://www.mikeconnor.de —–Urspr

Question:

Phew. All kinds of generalities there, probably none of it of much help. But at least I didn’t skewer you ;^)

Actually, since he didn’t specify the conditions he would be fishing or his casting style, you sort of did by making him read yet another post about preferences<g. — Charlie…

Response:

I just read through this thread hoping to pick up some reasoning for what would be the virtue of a slower action rod and I have to tell you I found almost zero usefull information.  Would you guys consider starting a new group alt.love_lost.2.old.rod?

Uh uh uh. Don’t taunt the bears! Wouldn’t be prudent. Or better yet, tell me why (and where) a slow rod beats a fast rod.

I believe that’s mostly a matter of casting style and/or experience. For many folks, especially less experienced ones, slower rods telegraph their loaded point louder than fast rods do, so a slower rod can be easier to cast – or learn to cast. The faster the rod the less obvious that same loaded-point becomes. One could make a case, I suppose, that a slower rod is easier to use in tight quarters (small streams, etc) regardless of casting style or expertise. I don’t have any wicked-fast small stream rods, they’re all moderate action or even a bit slow. I do have some real telephone poles for stripers and bluefish, however (eg: 9wt IMX, 7wt RPLX) as well as a couple of moderate-action rods (eg: 9wt IM6, 7wt IM6) and for fighting wind over the ocean I like casting the faster rods – which throw a tighter loop (very useful when casting side-arm to get down under the worst of the wind). I still have a couple of glass rods but really hated fishing saltwater with them. Too damned slow, not as much backbone, and casting a wide loop side-arm can be really risky business ;^) Phew. All kinds of generalities there, probably none of it of much help. But at least I didn’t skewer you ;^) /daytripper

Response:

Aw c’mon Ken, the quality of free advice just wasn’t up to his standards.

I just don’t like whiners. I mean, I read his post hoping to find a really good borscht recipe. That damn post mentioned nothing whatsoever about borscht, but you don’t hear me whining about it. — Ken Fortenberry

Response:

I feel the LL is one of Sage’s best creation.  It is one of the nicest rods to cast a line with.  I have a 389-3LL and use a Stillwater taper for most of my lake fishing.  I’ve even gone as far as using a type 2 uniform sink from SA.  It actually casted fine.   My buddy has a 489 and uses all different sink rates of lake lines on it.  You will need to make subtle changes to your casting stroke in order to make up for the slower action.  What rod do you have? Thanks, — Forrest http://www.FlyFishingREVIEW.com FlyFishingREVIEW.com win any SAGE rod! Before you buy.

Response:

I’ll register in on the love side.   I’ve always preferred the softer action of the LL series, and the 490 LL is my absolute favorite rod ever. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Any fans of the Sage Light Line Series out there?   Or for that matter, anybody hate the series? Personally I love it’s medium action and can’t believe they are discontinuing them (at least that’s what I heard).  Has anyone tried casting this rod with a sink tip or a wet line?  If so I’d particularly like to hear from you. Thinking of getting new lines for this rod but want to hear some comments/suggestions from others that have tried different line combos on this rod before rushing out to waste money.  Reason why I’m hesitating is because its light weight plus medium action might make this rod a nightmare to cast with sink tips or wet lines. Thanks!

Response:

I also fall on the love side of the spectrum.  I think the LL and the RPL were the best rods Sage has made.   I currently own a SP+ which I use on the big open lakes and rivers out here in WA but I just bought a 2 pc. 3wt LL blank off of ebay for fishing the creeks and smaller waters.  I can’t wait to get it built.   Hopefully Sage will relearn the lesson that power isn’t everything and return to making these fine rods. Mike

Response:

I currently own a SP+ which I use on the big open lakes and rivers out here in WA but I just bought a 2 pc. 3wt LL blank off of ebay for fishing the creeks and smaller waters.  I can’t wait to get it built.

I saw that blank and damned near went after it myself to build my wife a rod; but I just have too many rod projects in the works for the present. (Fixing my son’s epoxy & repairing my broken 9 wt.)   I’m glad I didn’t drive the price up for you.  :-) Joe F.

Response:

I own a 9 foot 4 weight LL and love the thing. I am sick of fast action rods that stop a trout in its tracks. I also have an RPL+ 10 foot 7 weight and this is really a salmon rod. I caight a 14lb 2oz rainbow on it the other day and after a couple of minutes, the fish put its fins in the air and came quietly. Shame. I broke my big Sage in May, which is why August saw me fishing the Teifi at night for sea trout with my LL. I hooked, played and netted a fish of 5.5 lb and the fight was tremendous. So glad it wasn’t my RPL+. I have just bought a 3 piece 9 foot 6 weight SP and am dying to get out there with the thing. Softer action too, although not like the LL. The LL range is being continued, I understand, although only in a 3-piece and at a higher price. Bugger (woolly and otherwise)! Caspar – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Yep, I own 3 of the LL series…….2/4/6 wts.  Love ‘em.  I would class their action more as slow to medium, than strictly medium.  My casting style (if one could call it a ’style’, more like a grenade toss) is more suited to the slower action.  And no, I don’t use sinking lines on any of them because they are just not suited for throwing weight.  Having said that, I sometimes use a short piece of sinking leader to get the fly down if fishing in current or deeper water, but it is not a comfortable thing for me to do. If I’m tossing weighted buggers or need to use a sink tip, I switch to my St Croix medium action rods.  BTW, as to lines, I use SA Mastery or AirCell Supreme WF stuff.  FWIW- Frank Church Elkhart, IN USAF RETIRED Any fans of the Sage Light Line Series out there?   Or for that matter, anybody hate the series? Personally I love it’s medium action and can’t believe they are discontinuing them (at least that’s what I heard).  Has anyone tried casting this rod with a sink tip or a wet line?  If so I’d particularly like to hear from you. Thinking of getting new lines for this rod but want to hear some comments/suggestions from others that have tried different line combos on this rod before rushing out to waste money.  Reason why I’m hesitating is because its light weight plus medium action might make this rod a nightmare to cast with sink tips or wet lines. Thanks! Frank Church Elkhart, IN USAF RETIRED

Response:

I have cast a LL and am seriously thinking of getting a 489.  How do you think they compare with an SP or SPl?  Any comments would be greatly appreciated. Chris Brown

Response:

Any fans of the Sage Light Line Series out there?  

I have a 490-4 LL that I’m quite fond of. I’ve tried several DT & WF floating lines on it, but no sinking lines. What works best for me is a Wulff TT 3/4. — Ken Fortenberry

Response:

I own a 9 foot 4 weight LL and love the thing. I am sick of fast action rods that stop a trout in its tracks. I also have an RPL+ 10 foot 7 weight and this is really a salmon rod. I caight a 14lb 2oz rainbow on it the other day and after a couple of minutes, the fish put its fins in the air and came quietly. Shame.

[snip] Some people would say that was a good thing.

Response:

Chris, I like the SP action and use it for the most part.  I have a couple SP+’s and in the wind and for long casting, prefer them.  I fished a SPL last spring for a week and found it just too much like a noodle.  Too slow for me. Regards, Mike – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I have cast a LL and am seriously thinking of getting a 489.  How do you think they compare with an SP or SPl?  Any comments would be greatly appreciated. Chris Brown

Response:

I’ve had three LLs, one SP, one RPL and two RPs.  The LLs were always my favourites and my current 590 LL (an older graphite II model) will cast a type V sinktip with no problem.  Just have to open up the loop a bit, that’s all.  I do a lot of streamer fishing so all of my trout rods have to be able to throw sinktips as well as floating lines. Slow action doesn’t necessarily mean less power. Cheers Visit The Streamer Page at http://members.home.net/pcharles/streamers/index.html

Response:

The Sage 389LL was one of the finest small-stream dry fly rods ever created.  It was originally produced in graphite II, and is one of the few blanks that survived a transition to graphite III without problems or substantial reworking.   Interestingly enough, it won a FR&R Kudo as a 2 weight – the slower action allowed it to load effectively with a 2 or a 3.  I fished mine (lost in the fire, alas) with a Triangle Taper 2/3, and it was superb.   I sorely miss it.  Since the fire, I bought one of the new SPL rods to replace it, but it just isn’t quite the same…….                                         Michael – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I currently own a SP+ which I use on the big open lakes and rivers out here in WA but I just bought a 2 pc. 3wt LL blank off of ebay for fishing the creeks and smaller waters.  I can’t wait to get it built. I saw that blank and damned near went after it myself to build my wife a rod; but I just have too many rod projects in the works for the present. (Fixing my son’s epoxy & repairing my broken 9 wt.)   I’m glad I didn’t drive the price up for you.  :-) Joe F.

Response:

I picked up a 490-4 LL blank on ebay recently (a major relief for me – I thought I’d lost that rod forever).  It was being sold by Drake Rod Co. – the lady told me that she had a couple of them in stock, and I believe that she also had a 490-3 LLB as well.  If anyone’s interested in contacting them drop me an email and I’ll see if I can scare up the contact info.                                 Michael Roegner – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Any fans of the Sage Light Line Series out there?   I have a 490-4 LL that I’m quite fond of. I’ve tried several DT & WF floating lines on it, but no sinking lines. What works best for me is a Wulff TT 3/4.

Response:

I got a 356 LL 2 years ago ( Yep, 5′-6") and absolutely love it for the small creeks I fish. I can cast under the canopy, cart it around in the bushes without getting hung up, and it casts up to 50′ with no problems, though it’s rare I see that much open space where I use it. I understand it was discontinued last year.         Steve

Response:

I have the 490 3LL and I absolutely adore it.  I plan to get some new lines for it soon but wasn’t sure how well it would cast heavier lines like sink tips and wet lines. After hearing from a few people that’s actually tried sink tips and full sinks, I think I will give it a try.   Afterall, I like the rod so much I want to use it for most, if not all, of my outtings, both stream and lake. Thanks for the info. Ken. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I feel the LL is one of Sage’s best creation.  It is one of the nicest rods to cast a line with.  I have a 389-3LL and use a Stillwater taper for most of my lake fishing.  I’ve even gone as far as using a type 2 uniform sink from SA.  It actually casted fine.   My buddy has a 489 and uses all different sink rates of lake lines on it.  You will need to make subtle changes to your casting stroke in order to make up for the slower action.  What rod do you have? Thanks, — Forrest http://www.FlyFishingREVIEW.com FlyFishingREVIEW.com win any SAGE rod! Before you buy.

Response:

(Flyfis4fun) writes: I also fall on the love side of the spectrum.  I think the LL and the RPL were the best rods Sage has made.   Hopefully Sage will relearn the lesson that power isn’t everything and return to making these fine rods. Moral of the story, if you find a rod you love, buy at least three of them cause sooner or later they ain’t gonna make em no more.

Oh Mister Gear Whore, you’re my HERO!

Response:

(Flyfis4fun) writes: I also fall on the love side of the spectrum.  I think the LL and the RPL were the best rods Sage has made.  

{snip} Hopefully Sage will relearn the lesson that power isn’t everything and return to making these fine rods.

Moral of the story, if you find a rod you love, buy at least three of them cause sooner or later they ain’t gonna make em no more. Wayne Knight (remove nospam to respond via mail) Expert in the creation of  wind knots and tailing loops.

Response:

I just read through this thread hoping to pick up some reasoning for what would be the virtue of a slower action rod and I have to tell you I found almost zero usefull information.  Would you guys consider starting a new group alt.love_lost.2.old.rod?  Or better yet, tell me why (and where) a slow rod beats a fast rod. Mike

Response:

I just read through this thread hoping to pick up some reasoning for what would be the virtue of a slower action rod and I have to tell you I found almost zero usefull information.  Would you guys consider starting a new group alt.love_lost.2.old.rod?  Or better yet, tell me why (and where) a slow rod beats a fast rod. Mike

How in the hell can you read a newsgroup with your head stuck up your ass like that ? — Ken Fortenberry

Response:

I just read through this thread hoping to pick up some reasoning for what would be the virtue of a slower action rod and I have to tell you I found almost zero usefull information.  Would you guys consider starting a new group alt.love_lost.2.old.rod?  Or better yet, tell me why (and where) a slow rod beats a fast rod. Mike How in the hell can you read a newsgroup with your head stuck up your ass like that ?

Aw c’mon Ken, the quality of free advice just wasn’t up to his standards. What do you expect him to do, an internet search for articles or something? I mean, after all his vast contributions it seems he deserves better than this<g. — Charlie…

Response:

I just read through this thread hoping to pick up some reasoning for what would be the virtue of a slower action rod and I have to tell you I found almost zero usefull information.  Would you guys consider starting a new group alt.love_lost.2.old.rod?  Or better yet, tell me why (and where) a slow rod beats a fast rod. Mike

Let me take a minute here to wipe the sarcasm off your post, then I’ll try and answer your question.  First off, It isn’t a case of slow vs. fast, rather that each has it’s own characteristics that you can exploit in different situations. The biggest determinant is personal preference; some people love ‘em others don’t.  For the rest of the list of characteristics, these are generalizations and there are plenty of exceptions.  For sake of argument, assume that I’m comparing a slow Orvis Superfine 5 wt, to a fast Sage RPL+ 5 wt. Slow rods (Orvis Superfine) Loads easily with only a little line Short cast, mend and roll cast well Tend to be tolerant of under and over-lining Less fatiguing over a long day of fishing More delicate presentation Fast rods (Sage RPL+) Handles the wind better Stiff butt section gives better lifting power Easier to cast long Tighter loop control Pinpoint accuracy is easier But having said all of that, a good caster can be pinpoint accurate and handle the wind with a Superfine, or lay down a delicate cast with an RPL+ so we end up back with personal preference.   But there’s another determinant that you should keep in mind.  Some rods have a progressive action while others have more radical action. By this I mean that a progressive rod will simply work further down into the butt, the longer you cast and the more power you apply.  The relationship between power and distance on the one hand and how far the rod works into the butt on the other, is more or less linear. Casting a progressive rod doesn’t really take a change of casting stroke to cast long; merely lengthen the stroke a bit and apply a little more power.  Radical actions change between tip and butt so you may have a soft tip married to a stiff butt that requires a change in your casting stroke when casting long.  Radical actions try to combine the merits of slow and fast action rods in one but you have to pay a price by altering your casting stroke to accomondate the transition between slow tip and fast butt as the casting distance lengthens. Here’s a comparison – if you took an old Sage RPL 8 wt. and a Loomis GL3 Megataper 8/9 wt., and deflection tested them with identical weights, you may find that both delfected about the same amount so they would both be considered fast.  But the Sage would be bending well into the butt while the Loomis would accomodate most of the bending in the tip. So when casting, you’d find the Loomis will short cast easier but the Sage would be easier to cast over the full limits of its range.  The Loomis action was intended for flats fishing where you’d pick up a short bit of line with the tip, load quickly then bang out 60′-70′ with the butt, all in one casting motion.  The RPL would probably need one false cast to do the same. Next time don’t be so sarcastic and I won’t make you read as much.  :) Cheers Visit The Streamer Page at http://members.home.net/pcharles/streamers/index.html

Response:

Yep, I own 3 of the LL series…….2/4/6 wts.  Love ‘em.  I would class their action more as slow to medium, than strictly medium.  My casting style (if one could call it a ’style’, more like a grenade toss) is more suited to the slower action.  And no, I don’t use sinking lines on any of them because they are just not suited for throwing weight.  Having said that, I sometimes use a short piece of sinking leader to get the fly down if fishing in current or deeper water, but it is not a comfortable thing for me to do.  If I’m tossing weighted buggers or need to use a sink tip, I switch to my St Croix medium action rods.  BTW, as to lines, I use SA Mastery or AirCell Supreme WF stuff.  FWIW- Frank Church Elkhart, IN USAF RETIRED – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Any fans of the Sage Light Line Series out there?   Or for that matter, anybody hate the series? Personally I love it’s medium action and can’t believe they are discontinuing them (at least that’s what I heard).  Has anyone tried casting this rod with a sink tip or a wet line?  If so I’d particularly like to hear from you. Thinking of getting new lines for this rod but want to hear some comments/suggestions from others that have tried different line combos on this rod before rushing out to waste money.  Reason why I’m hesitating is because its light weight plus medium action might make this rod a nightmare to cast with sink tips or wet lines. Thanks!

Frank Church Elkhart, IN USAF RETIRED

Response:

Any fans of the Sage Light Line Series out there?   Or for that matter, anybody hate the series? Personally I love it’s medium action and can’t believe they are discontinuing them (at least that’s what I heard).  Has anyone tried casting this rod with a sink tip or a wet line?  If so I’d particularly like to hear from you. Thinking of getting new lines for this rod but want to hear some comments/suggestions from others that have tried different line combos on this rod before rushing out to waste money.  Reason why I’m hesitating is because its light weight plus medium action might make this rod a nightmare to cast with sink tips or wet lines. Thanks!

Response:

Question:

I live in Boise and was wondering if there are any clubs or whatever to get me started in fly fishing.  I have fly fished  twice so I do not want to hinder/go with Pros.  Need a start as to where to go (spots), what equipment to get and so on.  Any help would be appreciated. Jeff

Response:

Hi Jeff, I don’t live in Idaho but have been a member of the Long Island(NY) Chapter of Trout Unlimited for 10 years & I have learned how to fish but more importantly I have learned about conservation .I did a search at  WWW.TU.ORG & found a chapter in Boise You can give their president a call & find out when they meet. Good Luck Sol Harz       Ted Trueblood Chapter — Andy Brunelle – President       PO Box 1971       Boise ID 83702       208-343-1510 (h)       www.idfishnhunt.com/tutedt.htm

Response:

whatever to get me started in fly fishing.  

Go to www.fedflyfishers.org to hook up with their closest fly fishing club.I am sure they have one in Boise.Our local club has rod making classes, fly tying classes,casting lessons, monthly outings etc.Go on one of their outings and play with their toys.Most flyfishers have some toys for sale so they can upgrade.Also most clubs have an a club auction at least once a year for fundraising which is another place to get equipment at very reasonable cost.Have fun! Big Dale

Response:

Jeff, Talk to John at Angler’s Fly Shop.  He has some great beginners classes in both fly fishing and fly tying.  He is also very willing to help a person new to the sport get started.  There are some great spots near Boise, I live in Meridian. Once the Boise River drops for Fall and Winter there are some great spots close to home.  You can also attend the Boise Valley Fly Fishermen or Fly Fishermen of Idaho, I’m not sure of their meeting times or anything else.  But, it takes a while to get to know the people there.  I went a few years ago to the BVFF and not a single person talked to me.  Let me know how things go, I can give you some of my spots for Fall and Winter.   Tight Lines, Clint

Response:

Best way to learn and get involved is to come to the next joint meeting of the Ted Trueblood Chapter of Trout Unlimited and the Boise Valley Fly Fishermen. We  will continue our joint member meetings at 600 N. Curtis (Odd Fellows Hall),  across from West Junior High School.  Fly tying begins at 6:30 p.m., and the  meeting at 7:30 p.m. SEPTEMBER 14 MEETING PROGRAM by Rick Prange         Monte McClendon is going to do a program on two conservation projects that BVFF  and Trout Unlimited has been involved with.  He will be giving us an update on  the excellent stream recovery that has occurred at Long Tom Creek since we  first built fence there in 1996.  We followed up with a willow plant in 1997.  Over the last several seasons, Monte has been monitoring the riparian  vegetation restoration and has some slides that vividly show how the  stream/trout habitat has improved.  Regional IDFG Fishery Manager, Dale Allen,  will also provide results of electrofishing Long Tom Creek for trout in the  project area.  Blackstone Reservoir is the second project that Monte and Dale  will be discussing with us.  Blackstone has been stocked by IDFG with 5,000  6-inch sterile rainbow trout to help establish a potential quality fishery.  Dale has recommended that limited harvest/gear restrictions at Blackstone be  approved by the IDFG Commission for the next 2-year fishing regulation period.  We have a club project/outing scheduled at Blackstone in early October.  Monte  will be filling us in on that.  Fly tying demos start at 6:30.

Response:

Question:

I like mine as light as possible. Just had to……

Response:

Does anyone have an opinion about the best type of boot/sock combo for portaging and keeping your feet dry on a Boundary Waters/Quetico type trip during the summer?

        After long consideration (and posting of the same question years ago), I’ve concluded there is no perfect answer. Sandals can be great for allowing you to jump out of the canoe off of a bad landing in deeper water, but are crap for ankle support on rocky portages, or negotiating blow-downs, limbs, etc. (And what about the danger of a splinter under the toenail?) High boots would seem to be the ticket, but there’s the weight and they can tend to be hot. Really choice seems to be support or dryness. One thing I’ve thought about is a pair of those jungle boots guys had in Vietnam

Question:

Hello, I was wondering if anyone know how the fly fishing is out in the Ozarks? Is the Missouri side any better than the Arkansas side?  I know they’re just political boundaries, but there may be some latitude-altitide differences that make the north vs. south sides superior for fishing. Thanks for any pointers!                                                 -Yiing Lin

       That’s easy, the south is always best. Don’t listen to them damn yankees.                                                           John Popp                                                       in Sanford Fl.

Response:

Get Missouri Ozark Waterways and the Missouri Conservation Atlas from the Mo. Conservation Comm. Outdoor Library, P.O. Box 180, Jefferson City MO 65102.  The Mo. Ozark Waterways is the definitive guide to streams in the Ozarks.  The Conservation Atlas is a Guide to Conservation Commissioned owned property.  They administer all the river accesses. I could make a joke about Arkansas and farm animals and such but I will resist. I posted a long answer to a question like this a few months ago.  You should be able to find it on Deja News.  Don’t have time to write anymore right now. Hello, I was wondering if anyone know how the fly fishing is out in the Ozarks? Is the Missouri side any better than the Arkansas side?  I know they’re just political boundaries, but there may be some latitude-altitide differences that make the north vs. south sides superior for fishing. Thanks for any pointers!                                                 -Yiing Lin

–         –Dan Cytron             Good judgment comes from experience.  Experience comes from bad judgment.                 –Bill Hayes         My skydiving pictures website is at http://www.nightowl.net/~dcytron         SOAR Inflatables, manufacturer and distributor of the         SOAR Inflatable canoe, has a website at http://www.soar1.com.

Response:

Hello, I was wondering if anyone know how the fly fishing is out in the Ozarks? Is the Missouri side any better than the Arkansas side?  I know they’re just political boundaries, but there may be some latitude-altitide differences that make the north vs. south sides superior for fishing. Thanks for any pointers!                                                 -Yiing Lin

Response:

Question:

what is the best way to clean line?  I use Wilson Creek the night before I go Fishing.  I can not handle my line not flowing through the rod when I am mending a drift.  What do other people do to clean line?

Response:

what is the best way to clean line?  I use Wilson Creek the night before I go Fishing.  I can not handle my line not flowing through the rod when I am mending a drift.  What do other people do to clean line?

Unfortunately, I don’t clean my lines as often as I should.  When they no longer fit through the guides, I know I’ve got too much crud on them. Seriously, the cheapest way to actually clean a fly line (in my opinion) is to wash it in a tub with soapy water.  Then, rinse in clean water and wipe dry.  That deals with the cleaning issue.  Keeping a line conditioned is another matter.  I have purchased a lot of lines over the years and have a desk drawer full of the line conditioners that come with the fly lines.  I use these for the most part…just because I have them, they work and I haven’t found a need to purchase anything else.  I’ve also used Armor All (sp??) on lines at times and it seems to work…but I’ve not checked with any of the line manufacturers about it.  Perhaps someone can tell me if I’m doing any damage to the lines with it.  It sure helps with my shooting line in terms of decreasing friction and adding to the length of my casts. Barry Brown

Response:

   I like Bon Ami, a sponge and a bucket of warm water. When the line is dry run some Russ Peaks over it. Like new till it gets dirty again.     On the water I use those abrasive pads sold by SA fo rcleaning lines. They’re great for a couple of times then they get all gunky.    -Ralph what is the best way to clean line?  I use Wilson Creek the night before I go Fishing.  I can not handle my line not flowing through the rod when I am mending a drift.  What do other people do to clean line?

Ralph and Lisa Cutter. California School of Flyfishing http:www/flyline.com  /v/                             /v/

Response:

what is the best way to clean line?  I use Wilson Creek the night before I go Fishing.  I can not handle my line not flowing through the rod when I am mending a drift.  What do other people do to clean line?

By default, I use Glide.  It’s all the two local shops sell. Does anyone still sell the "Greased Lightening" line cleaner?  I don’t even see it in the catalogs anymore.

Response:

I have been using that Scientific Anglers stuff.  It has a small cleaning pad and then some goop to put on the line.  It seems to work very well although the cleaning pads get dirty very quickly.  BTW, the Orvis line cleaning kit is exactly the same as the Scientific Anglers one. MikeH

Response:

what is the best way to clean line?  I use Wilson Creek the night before I go Fishing.  I can not handle my line not flowing through the rod when I am mending a drift.  What do other people do to clean line? By default, I use Glide.  It’s all the two local shops sell. Does anyone still sell the "Greased Lightening" line cleaner?  I don’t even see it in the catalogs anymore.

There is some new stuff by Tiemco that is really slick. Russ Peak line dressing has been popular for years. Many use Mucilin paste. I would first wash the line in mild soap, Ivory liquid, and dry it, if it is really dirty. Bill Kiene Kiene’s Fly Shop Sacramento,CA,USA 800/4000FLY

Response:

(sp??) on lines at times and it seems to work…but I’ve not checked with any of the line manufacturers about it.  Perhaps someone can tell me if I’m doing any damage to the lines with it.  It sure helps with my shooting line in terms of decreasing friction and adding to the length of my casts. Barry Brown

Barry and Others: Armor-All is a repolymerizer, and yes, does well to protect your Vinyl lines.  However, it is an emulsion and the emulsifiers stay on the line. This allows the stuff to be washed off the line when you use it in water.  A better formulation is the Blue Coral non-aqueous stuff with "Fomblin".  It repells water and helps you line float like a cork. Nothing shoots line like this stuff and nothing lasts longer. Jason Beary

Response:

Question:

Any ideas on shad fishing in the Columiba River would be appreciated. Thanks! K Lawson

Response:

Any ideas on shad fishing in the Columiba River would be appreciated. Thanks! K Lawson

My father in law uses a white jig or maybe its a small white fly.  I didn’t go and it was 5 years ago or so when he told me.  He fishes by McNary dam I think it is, downstream of the dam. Nice size fish I saw them, but I personally haven’t fished for shad. Tight lines.

Response:

Question:

I am new to this group so don’t know if there are other groups where this msg would be better posted.  Any suggestions regarding that would be appreciated. I am organizing a trip to Boundary Waters Canoe Area in MN for the end of July, 1996.  There will be 4 adults and 8 Boy Scouts in the age range 13-15.  All the kids are experienced campers and have at least some experience canoeing.  I have not been to BWCA before and would appreciate any words of wisdom that those with experience might have to offer.  Our current plan is to use Isabella Lake (Pt 35) as the entry point.  We will be on the lakes from 7/22/96 through 7/27/96.  We have already received our reservation confirmation from the Forest Service. One specific question I have regards water filtration systems.  What is the current state-of-the-art?  What should I consider? My ISP doesn’t keep msg for this newsgroup very long and I am afraid I might miss posted responses.  e-mail responses would me most appreciated. Tim: I don’t have any experience with boundary waters but I did take my troops venture crew into Algonquin Park last year for a week long canoe trip. I would expect that the water system we used might be of help to you. We took three PUR scout water purifers with the charcoal filters. One was personal gear and was kept in reserve. The other to were asigned to each of the patrols. We selected the PUR’s for two reasons. First they are purifers ie have an iodine matrex inside the filtering element. Second , ther price. About $60 (US) Their rated service life is about 200 gallons(US) per unit. These worked very well for us. As to other newsgroups where you mighrt post to, Have you trie rec.scouting. If you can tolerate all the BSA political threads, it a good newsgroup to check out. Hope this is of some help to you. Bill Schooley T-391 Hamburg, Mi.

Response:

I am new to this group so don’t know if there are other groups where this msg would be better posted.  Any suggestions regarding that would be appreciated. I am organizing a trip to Boundary Waters Canoe Area in MN for the end of July, 1996.  There will be 4 adults and 8 Boy Scouts in the age range 13-15.  All the kids are experienced campers and have at least some experience canoeing.  I have not been to BWCA before and would appreciate any words of wisdom that those with experience might have to offer.  Our current plan is to use Isabella Lake (Pt 35) as the entry point.  We will be on the lakes from 7/22/96 through 7/27/96.  We have already received our reservation confirmation from the Forest Service. One specific question I have regards water filtration systems.  What is the current state-of-the-art?  What should I consider? My ISP doesn’t keep msg for this newsgroup very long and I am afraid I might miss posted responses.  e-mail responses would me most appreciated. Thanks in advance for any responses! — ——      X      Tim C. Perry    T/cP    DSA, Inc.             314-576-5101

Response:

It has been several years since we went to BWCA.  You will really enjoy.   I don’t recall your entry point.  Good TOPO’s are helpful.  We found many of their maps were poorly done.  Be prepared for possible T-shorms.  It can put scouts through some weather stress because you can see storms coming for quite some time.  The water you cross can be big and quite choppy depending on the days.  The water is/was close to pottable so purifier shjould be satisfactory.  Don’t expect to carry the canoe and your packs together on the portages.  Plan several trips back and forth.   Some can be long. Very serious about the maps though.  It is easy to get disoriented on the water.  Be open to second guessing yourself. But you should have a great trip–We loved it there.  I intend to take our kids there again.  It is a great wilderness experience.  Take your fishing gear. Since your canoeing and not backpacking you can pack a bit of extra gear.  I suggest you make some bread.  The aroma in camp in the morning is unparalleled. PS be prepared for sketters and you may still be in black fly season.

Response:

Question:

Anyone have any comments on the use of sinking and sinktip lines as i do quite a bit of lake fishing and I still prefer to stick with the flyrod. cheers — gp

Response:

I have fished lakes extensively, and used all types of sinking and sink tip lines.  It’s kind of a trade off between water depth, line density and sink tip length and leader length.  I have found full sinking (intermediate, med. density and fast sinking shooting heads) to be more effective than sink tips, but it’s probably personal preference.  The teeny nymph T series lines are good too (a T200 works well with 5, 6 weights). I haven’t used uniform sink lines, but they seem like a good idea.   Sinking lines are difficult to pick up out of the water, but once you do you can cast them a mile.  Remember, use a short leader, so as not to defeat the purpose of a sinking line.  Hang on, there are some big fish in some of the lakes I fish.

Response:

Anyone have any comments on the use of sinking and sinktip lines as i do quite a bit of lake fishing and I still prefer to stick with the flyrod. cheers — gp

With in the past 5 years I have gone to a Uniform Sink tip line as you can maintain the fly in the fishing zone longer.  With a sink tip you strip or troll though the zone but don’t remain in the zone.  This is the same with fullsinking line.  I have been using this line find it to much more effective for lake fishing.  Check it out.  Joe

Response:

: Anyone have any comments on the use of sinking and sinktip lines as i do : quite a bit of lake fishing and I still prefer to stick with the flyrod. : cheers I have made up a number of short lead core lines with a loop at each end. To fish deep, I simply attach one of these lead leaders to any line. The can also be used as a shooting head with a small diameter shooting line or just a small level line. Works well, and it’s cheap. –mike

Response:

: Anyone have any comments on the use of sinking and sinktip lines as i do : quite a bit of lake fishing and I still prefer to stick with the flyrod. : cheers I have made up a number of short lead core lines with a loop at each end. To fish deep, I simply attach one of these lead leaders to any line. The can also be used as a shooting head with a small diameter shooting line or just a small level line. Works well, and it’s cheap. –mike

Mike I have good luck with cutting Cortland 333 Level Sinking line into 2′ 4′ and 6′ segments and putting loops on both ends. Tom

Response:

: Anyone have any comments on the use of sinking and sinktip lines as i do : quite a bit of lake fishing and I still prefer to stick with the flyrod. : cheers Gordon, I have used a sinking line for several years, and find it to be a nuisance to cast with; probably I should use a sink-tip instead. The major problem is that your rod has to have enough oomph to quickly get the line airborne – very easy when it’s floating on the surface, and hell when it’s submerged. Casting a sinker will cause you to work on your casting style I also tried using a length of lead-core trolling line to do some flyfishing for walleye – caught a fish (eventually) but that stuff is hazardous to cast. Conventional sinking lines will work okay to about 15 feet. Go to Hi-D (or leadcore) to go deeper. Best fly-caught laker was about 10#, from Great Slave Lake, on a sinker. — 3798 Woodland Drive     voice: (604) 368-9315 Trail, BC               data:  (604) 368-9341

Response: