Question:

I was hoping someone  had some information or plans on how i could build some fishing rod holders for my garage. I want to screw them to the ceiling. Thanks in advance for any help Wade

Response:

Wade, If no one has plans, let me know and I will trace mine for you. Gary

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I was hoping someone  had some information or plans on how i could build some fishing rod holders for my garage. I want to screw them to the ceiling. Thanks in advance for any help Wade

Response:

One of the best ways to hold your rods to the rafters of your garage is to install lengths of PVC pipe from the rafters.  Size determines how many rods you can put in each pipe. Single storage for the small pipe, multiple storage several rods in one spot.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I was hoping someone  had some information or plans on how i could build some fishing rod holders for my garage. I want to screw them to the ceiling. Thanks in advance for any help Wade

Response:

    This depends on what you are looking for.  As for mine, they are made from lenghts of 4" PVC pipe.  I have to cap mine, no glue, to keep the insects out.  Also keeps the dust and dirt off the equipment.  I have them tied to the ceiling stringers with cord as my garage is not lined.     Thought I’d pass this along.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I was hoping someone  had some information or plans on how i could build some fishing rod holders for my garage. I want to screw them to the ceiling. Thanks in advance for any help Wade

Response:

I was hoping someone  had some information or plans on how i could build some fishing rod holders for my garage. I want to screw them to the ceiling.

I knew a girl like that once . . . Marc, who luckily got older and wiser Seriously, depends on what kind of rods.  If it’s surf rods I’ll second the PVC suggestion.  Fly rods I’d just buy a contraption which hangs from the rafters and holds the rods horizontally.  Wouldn’t waste the time trying to build something like that.

Response:

Question:

Hello: Anyone know who sells Ed McMurray Ants  (I think they’re balsa wood in body). Any experiences with? Bob

Response:

Good question.  I used to use McMurray ants a lot in the days I used to fish Falling Spring Branch, the Letort and the Yellow Breeches.  Don’t see them in catalogs.  Try calling a PA fly shop. Cold Spring Anglers 717-245-2646 Fishing Creek Anglers   (570) 925-2709 JR — To reply, remove the Qs from the address above

Response:

Hello: Anyone know who sells Ed McMurray Ants  (I think they’re balsa wood in body).

I did a google search and this place came up http://www.murraysflyshop.com/. I bought some bodies years ago, from Orvis I believe, and still have some ants I tied with them. — Charlie…

Response:

Anyone know who sells Ed McMurray Ants  (I think they’re balsa wood in body).

You can make them yourself by preparing bodies in advance:  two tiny chunks of balsa, threaded on a piece of nylon, all dyed or painted black. — |        Carlsbad Springs, Ottawa, Canada        |

Response:

"Bob" writes: Anyone know who sells Ed McMurray Ants  (I think they’re balsa wood in body).

"Donald Phillipson" wrote You can make them yourself by preparing bodies in advance:  two tiny chunks of balsa, threaded on a piece of nylon, all dyed or painted black. Donald Phillipson

I would add:   Poke a needle through the balsa and shape the body parts with sandpaper or a Dremel tool.  Melt the ends of the nylon leader material with a match to form a glob after inserting it through the body parts.  Tie the middle of the body parts to the hook and take one wrap of short hackle around the middle.  It is much faster to make all the bodies at one time and add the nylon, hook and hackle later. Old Fart

Response:

Question:

Hi guys, what are your thoughts on this rod? ANdrew

Hi All,  Like so many other things in life, short/light rods are not for everyone. Here in Northern California, we have some ( hundred?  thousands? ) small streams that have ‘tons’ of fish under 10 inches. Today (things might change in week or so) I would personally choose to fish them with a Sage 8′2"#2 SPL or an 8′#2 Winston or some other little beauty. Think of fishing as fun. Well, what I would like to use really doesn’t count in the big picture. I think this is a problem with everything in life. Why should anyone expect everyone else to agree with them unless they think they know the answers to life??? Why are we so upset when someone else wants to do it a different way?  I would have been out of business years ago if every time a guy came in the store and wanted to buy a 6′ fly rod I said, " Well, what kind of idiot would even think of using a 6′ fly rod? Are you out of your mind?" No, you suggest that is a very short rod that is very specialized. Then you would find out, as I have so many times, that this person has several short rods that are all slightly longer than 6′ and he loves them. Get the picture? I think it is sad that there are fly fisherman that try to shove their person beliefs down everyone else throat. Why would they think they have the only answers and even the right answers? I am ready to have someone give me info that will change my mind or hopefully reinforce ideas that I have been forming for my lifetime. If you already have all the right answers then your learning is over. God might as well take you up to sit by his side so you can now straighten him out. Bill Kiene Kiene’s Fly Shop www.kiene.com

Response:

Why would they think they have the only answers and even the right answers? I am ready to have someone give me info that will change my mind or hopefully reinforce ideas that I have been forming for my lifetime. If you already have

all the right answers then your learning is over. God might as well take you up to sit by his side so you can now straighten him out.

My nomination for ROFF post of the year. How true Mr. Kiene. Wayne Knight Geneva IL                            

Response:

<wisdom snipped I would have been out of business years ago if every time a guy came in the store and wanted to buy a 6′ fly rod I said, " Well, what kind of idiot would even think of using a 6′ fly rod? Are you out of your mind?" <snip

Didn’t Lee Wulff often fish a 6′6" fiberglass Garcia for Atlantic Salmon? With enough time on the water, I may one day be 1/10th the idiot he was. Mu Young Lee    Ann Arbor, MI  USA

Response:

Why would they think they have the only answers and even the right answers? I am ready to have someone give me info that will change my mind or hopefully reinforce ideas that I have been forming for my lifetime. If you already have all the right answers then your learning is over. God might as well take you up to sit by his side so you can now straighten him out. My nomination for ROFF post of the year. How true Mr. Kiene.

I would agree completely, Wayne, except that I think I said that before about one of Bill’s posts.  Or was it Mike Conner?  Or maybe Willi…… or perhaps Skeeter….?  Who the hell knows, but this was a great one. Mark Faulkner

Response:

I got one 3 years ago for fishing brushy creeks and it worked perfectly for casting under the canopy. On trips to the Klamath Basin and the San Juan River I took it along for dry fly fishing and found the 3-weight line gave me a decided advantage in delicate presentations; I had no trouble with rainbows to 22". Needless to say, it’s useless for fishing strike indicator situations such as Lee’s Ferry, but it’s not a problem to cast 60′.

Response:

How the hell do these lite sticks survive in the brush?  It seems to me that a lot more care is required when you bushwack. Consequently, you bushwack less.

I agree that different gear choices mean different perspectives.  Guys who fish mainly in the salt, for instance, probaby have little appreciation for the delicate feel of a nice 3-wt.  But I disagree about the brush and bushwacking. Being in Montana, I have bigger rods, 5-6 wts., natch, but I take my little rod when I am going to bushwack.  I keep it in its tube, which is smaller and easier to lash onto a backpack or my hip pack (for daytrips) and hike up into the little tribs, or the smaller wilderness streams, where an 18-inch cutt is liable to be the biggest fish I’m going to meet.  In fact, I primarily use my three weight on days when I’m probably not going to see another soul.

Response:

OK, Ok, Ok Ill try someones 3 weight this summer. At least once. By the way, some of this reminds me of an old Lee Wulff article. Sorry but I tried a 1 and a 2 weight already. Never a "0." I felt like I had crossed over into weenie world and the next stop was an operating table in Denmark. Felt like I was play fishing. I know, I know. Adapt! I think Id rather head North and die in a snowbank. Daytripper has a point about the number of rods the average fisher has, and all that. Except for the SPL, mine are well worn vets. And you are right, I would not consider paying big bucks for a lite rod to target tiny fish. I catch enough of those already, thank you. But overall parsimony probably does play a role. If I need a new rod its an 8 or 10 weight for Salmon. Several folks made mention of the small trout opportunities on the Olympic Penn.. Yes indeed there are many small fish and small rivers. And I fish plenty of both. But thats not what I target on the Penninsula. Its taken me years to learn how to fish these rivers and I really know only a handful. There are decent size Cuts and bows in some of these small rivers much of the year.  And there are times when there are very large fish in these very small rivers.  You do not want to hook a Chum, Steelhead or King with one of these rods.  I would even go so far as to warn against fishing a 3 weight or less if there are any Pinks around. I can’t see a 1 or 2 weight in brushy water surviving that first run. One last item: By "runty brookies" I was not putting down the whole of the Squaretail Nation. Or the value of any fish less than 10 inches. Im referring to high lakes that are full of 2-5 inch malnorished fish. OK? (So now the Email death threats should stop?) Happy Easter Dave Snedeker

Response:

Ken Yes I do fish the small Olympic streams that flow into the Hood Canal. In particular the Big and the Little Quillcene. I carry one, strung 3 piece 9ft rod. When you are under the canopy, with brush all over, the length is an asset for dibbling, roll casts and when you have an ally to shoot straight up or down into stairstep pools (like on the Graywolf.) In the Skokomish and in the bigger pools, and when you have a gravel bar to work off of, its an asset in dealing with the wind which is always present here. Ditto if you also fish the lower streachs just before the salt.  Overall the longer rod makes it easier to get it out of the trees when you do get hung up. Im usually in the brush, and I almost never see others fishing who are not in my party. I do not hike into the high lakes anymore because most just have runty brookies by the thousands and its not worth it. To Charlie Machete? Hell no, see thats another point in favor of the Sage. You don’t have to carry a machete or a wading staff either. Dave – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I am not surprised, but am made more aware of the inherent differences in the group when I think about all this very light gear folks use: even some of the Montanans. I cannot conceive of finding a place hereabouts where fishing with a 1 or 2 weight for a whole day would be practical. Isn’t Bainbridge Island near the coast range (Olympics up there)? Down here in Oregon, there are tons of small streams in the coast mountains that a 2wt is great on.  Just gotta look around, there’s all sorts of stuff around the PNW if you’re willing to hike to it. Later,     – Ken — "Many go fishing all their lives without knowing that it is not fish they are after."             – Henry David Thoreau

Response:

David, Most of the fishing that I have been doing for the last several years involves "bushwhacking" to get to small streams in VA, PA and NY. I avoid fishing anywhere near other fisherman – not a misanthrope, mind you, I just don’t want anyone to see me when I blow an easy cast, or trip over a rock. These streams are small and tight enough that 7′ to 7 1/2′ is about all I can get away with. Even then, I’m on my knees a lot. I find it easy to subdue the brookies and browns that I regularly find with these small rods. They aren’t sick fish, just not big. A 9" brookie from some of these streams is a nice fish. Still, the occasional 14" brown is no problem when he/she comes along. And these fish are landed and released quickly and in apparently good condition. Still, I would not go lighter than this. BTW, my wife and I had several superb days on the Firehole in October, casting Baetis imitations to rising trout in the wind with Winston 8 1/2" 3 wts. Lots of fish hooked, quickly landed and released in good condition. Of course, other’s mileage may vary… -Doc

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I am not surprised, but am made more aware of the inherent differences in the group when I think about all this very light gear folks use: even some of the Montanans. I cannot conceive of finding a place hereabouts where fishing with a 1 or 2 weight for a whole day would be practical. Im just trying to understand how these things might be related to different perceptions of the sport. My own view of the resource and the sport is that both are more robust than the views of many of the brothers that are reflected in this NG.  I wonder how much gear choice affects the experiences that shape these different views of the sport? Dave Snedeker

I agree that a 1 or 2 is awfully light but I use a 9′ 3 wgt with a Cortland Clear Creek line quite often especially during low water conditions.  It presents small dries and nymphs with alot of delicacy. A 9′ rod, even a 3 wgt, can put alot of pressure on a fish, far more pressure than a 5X or lighter tippet can hold. Willi

Response:

Ken Yes I do fish the small Olympic streams that flow into the Hood Canal. In particular the Big and the Little Quillcene. I carry one, strung 3 piece 9ft rod. When you are under the canopy, with brush all over, the length is an asset for dibbling, roll casts and when you have an ally to shoot straight up or down into stairstep pools (like on the Graywolf.) In the Skokomish and in the bigger pools, and when you have a gravel bar to work off of, its an asset in dealing with the wind which is always present here. Ditto if you also fish the lower streachs just before the salt.  Overall the longer rod makes it easier to get it out of the trees when you do get hung up.

There appear to be two mindsets on fishing in tight quarters.  One says go with a longer rod for "dibbling" and roll casts, the other says to go with a shorter rod to avoid getting caught up on trees, plants, etc. I’ll agree with the roll casts being easier with the longer rod, but I don’t find an extra foot or so to be of much help with "dibbling". I prefer the shorter rods (but not too short) since generally they are small enough to sort of flip the fly out there without getting hung up on stuff.  I’ve got a 7′9" 2wt that’s perfect for those tight places on small streams. It all comes down to personal preference. Later,      - Ken — "Many go fishing all their lives without knowing that it is not fish  they are after."             – Henry David Thoreau

Response:

I am not surprised, but am made more aware of the inherent differences in the group when I think about all this very light gear folks use: even some of the Montanans. I cannot conceive of finding a place hereabouts where fishing with a 1 or 2 weight for a whole day would be practical. Same goes for lite double taper lines. Regional conditions and opportunities Im sure have a lot to do with it. Although when Ive fished backeast I have not noticed folks using particularly short, lite sticks.

I’ve lived in Colorado, the Olympic Peninsula in Washington, and Massachusetts. All three regions provide plenty of streams where a small rod is perfectly suited and can be more fun than a 9′/5W. I don’t see many people using small, light rods either, even on streams that can be jumped. But I chalk that up to most people not having invested in a broad arsenal. When a flyfisher collects a set of rods, which rod purchased is the small, light one? Second? Third? Fourth? And if the average flyfisher only has one or two fly rods, is one of them a small lightweight? I’ve fished with a lot of people, young and old, over the years, and I’d guess only one in five owns a short three weight or lighter rod. I think this kind of gear difference must affect our differing perceptions of the sport and the resiliance of the resource.  For example, someone who uses this lite gear and is still inadvertantly killing fish, must be dealing with some pretty small or pretty sick fish. I do catch lots of small fish myself, but I get them in quick, do not play them, and release them quick. If you are using a 1 weight you are going to have to play that same tiny fish. You will get more "sport" from the fish, but alot more WILL die.

Your presumption is that you can’t fight a decent size fish with a small, light rod, but I don’t agree. I’ve caught a few fish (eg: a 22" rainbow) on my little Winston 2wt that would put a heck of a bend in a six weight, but the fish were all caught in cold water, and were landed quick enough to avoid over stress (remember that God gave *us* the big brains to figure out how to deal with stuff like this ;^) How the hell do these lite sticks survive in the brush?  It seems to me that a lot more care is required when you bushwack. Consequently, you bushwack less. As a result you have to fish with the crowd in more open degraded conditions. Consequently you are fishing hatchery fish more often. Consequently wild fish are a thing of the past for you.  And you might become certain that the same is true all over.

Yikes! You left out plagues and locusts! ;^) But it just ain’t so. Cripes, I’ve damn near gotten looking for short cuts to water, but I don’t endanger my rods when thrashing through the brush. I at least keep my rod in its sock if I’m hiking any distance. Otherwise, it’s a lot easy to pick your way along the stream with a short rod than a nine footer! Besides that…The tip on one of my 10′ long saltwater rods is only 1/64" larger in diameter than the tip of my little Winston, and it’d probably snap even easier. I wouldn’t want to try poking through the bush with that! /daytripper

Response:

Hi guys, what are your thoughts on this rod? ANdrew

Response:

what are your thoughts on this rod?

  Love it.  Buy it.  Treat it like you wished your wife treated you.

Response:

Hi guys, what are your thoughts on this rod? ANdrew

    i have one, and it is a beautifully finished pleasure to fish.  but don’t expect to lay out a bunch of line. wayno – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

I sold mine and went to the 8 foot 4 weight because the wind always blows like crazy when I go.

Response:

Andrew asked:what are your thoughts on this rod? As I always say you can’t have too many good 3-Weights. The only places I think it would be out of place would be in a float tube or a West Texas Wind. Big Dale

Response:

Hi guys, what are your thoughts on this rod? ANdrew    i have one, and it is a beautifully finished pleasure to fish.  but don’t expect to lay out a bunch of line.

If that’s the case, go for Winston’s 7.5′ 2wt. Like everything the Winston people produce, it’s a gorgeous piece of workmanship. PLUS I can throw an entire, elderly SA DT2F with mine ;^) /daytripper

Response:

I am not surprised, but am made more aware of the inherent differences in the group when I think about all this very light gear folks use: even some of the Montanans. I cannot conceive of finding a place hereabouts where fishing with a 1 or 2 weight for a whole day would be practical. Same goes for lite double taper lines. Regional conditions and opportunities Im sure have a lot to do with it. Although when Ive fished backeast I have not noticed folks using particularly short, lite sticks. I think this kind of gear difference must affect our differing perceptions of the sport and the resiliance of the resource.  For example, someone who uses this lite gear and is still inadvertantly killing fish, must be dealing with some pretty small or pretty sick fish. I do catch lots of small fish myself, but I get them in quick, do not play them, and release them quick. If you are using a 1 weight you are going to have to play that same tiny fish. You will get more "sport" from the fish, but alot more WILL die. How the hell do these lite sticks survive in the brush?  It seems to me that a lot more care is required when you bushwack. Consequently, you bushwack less. As a result you have to fish with the crowd in more open degraded conditions. Consequently you are fishing hatchery fish more often. Consequently wild fish are a thing of the past for you.  And you might become certain that the same is true all over. Im just trying to understand how these things might be related to different perceptions of the sport. My own view of the resource and the sport is that both are more robust than the views of many of the brothers that are reflected in this NG.  I wonder how much gear choice affects the experiences that shape these different views of the sport? Dave Snedeker – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi guys, what are your thoughts on this rod? ANdrew    i have one, and it is a beautifully finished pleasure to fish.  but don’t expect to lay out a bunch of line. If that’s the case, go for Winston’s 7.5′ 2wt. Like everything the Winston people produce, it’s a gorgeous piece of workmanship. PLUS I can throw an entire, elderly SA DT2F with mine ;^) /daytripper

Response:

How the hell do these lite sticks survive in the brush?  It seems to me that a lot more care is required when you bushwack. Consequently, you bushwack less. As a result you have to fish with the crowd in more open degraded conditions. Consequently you are fishing hatchery fish more often. Consequently wild fish are a thing of the past for you.  And you might become certain that the same is true all over.

Wow, lost me on the logic in that one.  I "bushwack" my way to small streams on a regular basis and then use lighter rods.  Haven’t encountered much that has worried me about the safety of my rods.  I’m far more worried about slipping on a rock and breaking a rod than trompsing through the woods and breaking a rod.  There’s one spot I regularly frequent which required climbing down a 75ft sheer bank, the rods stay in their tubes for that one, although I’m sure a fall there would break an 8wt as well as a 2wt. Oh well, later,      - Ken — "Many go fishing all their lives without knowing that it is not fish  they are after."             – Henry David Thoreau

Response:

I am not surprised, but am made more aware of the inherent differences in the group when I think about all this very light gear folks use: even some of the Montanans. I cannot conceive of finding a place hereabouts where fishing with a 1 or 2 weight for a whole day would be practical.

Isn’t Bainbridge Island near the coast range (Olympics up there)? Down here in Oregon, there are tons of small streams in the coast mountains that a 2wt is great on.  Just gotta look around, there’s all sorts of stuff around the PNW if you’re willing to hike to it. Later,      - Ken — "Many go fishing all their lives without knowing that it is not fish  they are after."             – Henry David Thoreau

Response:

Question:

Can anyone tell me anything about the aerocomp kits and company? They look to offer a good plane with a claim for relatively low build times. Does anyone know if the build times are realistic? Are the kits relatively easy to put together? Is the company trustworthy? Etc. Scott

Response:

Can anyone tell me anything about the aerocomp kits and company? They look to offer a good plane with a claim for relatively low build times. Does anyone know if the build times are realistic? Are the kits relatively easy to put together? Is the company trustworthy? Etc. Scott

Scott; I have been asking the same questions, about CompAir 6.  General responses were yes, the kit is as advertised, and build times are fairly realistic based on semi experienced builders.  Dealing with the company was said to be excellent, and the fit and tolerance of the parts (a major part of ease of assembly and finishing) is said to be excellent also.  I’ll be visiting the factory hopefully in December to review the kit, and then again in February if I decide favorably.  e-mail me in January if you are still interested and serious. Geoff. Geoffrey M. Wood Profile Composites, Inc. Sidney, BC, Canada

Response:

Aloha: I hate to rain on your parade, but I would be careful. I don’t know anything about this company, but I’ve had past dealings with Ron Lueck. He and his late dad were behind the now defunct "Airshark" from their company Freedom Master. Lots of BS, no builders flying. About 30 kits were sold, none flying now. Ron’s sister is a lawyer, so watch out. I flew in the second prototype with Ron, and was amazed at his B.S. He refused to concede that they directly copied and scaled-down the a German seaplane design known as the Equator, from Dr. Poeschel (mit umlatt bitte). Even Ron declared the first Airshark prototype too dangerous to fly, and when Ron and his dad tried to take off from Lake Winnebago (fresh, not salt water), the water flowed over the wing rather than under it. Two years later, Ron waterlooped the second prototype in the same location. (I’ll admit the airframe was strong, as the engine moved in its mounts enough for the prop to hit the turtledeck, but basically now damage from a high speed incident). Ron also got into major legal disputes with the investor in Freedom Master I don’t know anything about the other people involved and they may have Ron on a short leash; Ron does do nice building. I’ll probably hear from Ron or his mouthpiece for posting this info, so screw them in advance. DB

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Can anyone tell me anything about the aerocomp kits and company? They look to offer a good plane with a claim for relatively low build times. Does anyone know if the build times are realistic? Are the kits relatively easy to put together? Is the company trustworthy? Etc. Scott Scott; I have been asking the same questions, about CompAir 6.  General responses were yes, the kit is as advertised, and build times are fairly realistic based on semi experienced builders.  Dealing with the company was said to be excellent, and the fit and tolerance of the parts (a major part of ease of assembly and finishing) is said to be excellent also.  I’ll be visiting the factory hopefully in December to review the kit, and then again in February if I decide favorably.  e-mail me in January if you are still interested and serious.

I too was intrigued by the advertised 350 hour build time, so I followed up in this group and by calling the factory.  It seems that the 350 hour time is airframe only – without "even a radio" in the words of Ron Lueck.  I think that when other kit manufacturers spout numbers, they are actually including wiring the panel, putting the engine in, and painting the airplane.  This process increases the Comp Air build times to equal the fast build times of most other kit manufacturers.  In addition, the 350 hours is the build time not of an "average" builder, but of their factory team.  I think the "average" builder would take much longer. The STOL capabilities of the Comp Air series are undoubtedly great. The cruise speeds leave something to be desired. From a composite airframe, I’d expect it to be faster.  The whole thing looks very boxy to me, nothing like the sleek lines you’d expect from a composite airplane.  Pilot reports also indicated that the Comp Air planes were very heavy in roll. I ordered their info pak and the video.  The video was 1 hour and 48 minutes long, but was a real amateur job.  The camera was a handheld, it was jerky and I actually got motion sick watching some parts of it!  I didn’t get a good feeling about the professionalism of the company from the stuff they put out.  This is not to say that the airplanes or the company isn’t any good – just that I didn’t feel that comfortable after reviewing their materials and considering their build time claims. Of all the 4 and more place composite kits I looked at, the ones that came off most professionally were the Velocity, Express and KIS shops (Lancair is out of my price range). I was initially leaning toward the Velocity, and even went for a test flight out at Velocity West.  Nancy Machado was quite nice, but Mark Machado just seemed surly the whole time I was there. Anyway I found the Velocity 173 to be too small (no luggage space) while the XL was pricey!  $12K just for fast build wings, wow. One of the Velocity newsletters stated that Avemco required 500 hours to insure a Velocity (which I don’t have).  Velocity seems like a very reputable and solid shop, so I would recommend them if you want to build one, and can stand the price and insurance requirements. The Express was an interesting plane, and their package came in full color brochures.  It looks like a great plane and one I would love to build one day.  Expensive though.  Both the Velocity XL and Express seem to want large 260 – 300 hp engines.  Also, the fact that this was the third iteration of the company didn’t inspire confidence. For my money, I got the KIS Cruiser from Tri-R Technologies. Rich Trickel is great to talk to, and the amount of airplane you get for your money can’t be beat, IMHO.  I’m biased, of course, but check out the KIS!  4 place, fixed gear, fixed pitch prop, cruise at 160 knots on 180 hp.  And non-exaggerated build time claims. stan – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Geoff. Geoffrey M. Wood Profile Composites, Inc. Sidney, BC, Canada

Response:

I started to keep my mouth shut here but I think my two cents worth may be informative. I have been going to Sun ‘N Fun for several years now and was there when the first factory assembled Comp Monster arrived. I have been through their display and sat in the planes year after year. I have talked to Ron some, but I have also talked a lot to several builders. First let me address the "square" look. If these planes were supposed to be Glasairs or Lancairs they would be. THese planes are work horses, designed to carry a lot of people and their junk. THey are high lift designs that gain nothing by having rounded corners on the fuselage. The plane is designed the be easy to construct. It looks similar to the planes in this niche– The C-182, Maules, even the Helio or Beaver. Square corners gives you a lot of nooks and cranies in which to stuff that last piece of  camping gear or fishing gear or one more sheet of plywood for that lakeside cabin you are building that has no other access than with your float equiped Comp 6. Now the speed, a plane designed to be mounted on floats that can cruise at 140 to 160 mph is a rare bird indeed. These planes provide good cross-country speed with the comfortably low stall speed. They aren’t everybody’s plane but they fit the bill for a great number of us. Now for building speed. I have talked to a couple of builders that were flying their Comp Monsters in 600 hours– experienced builders but not factory people. Have you ever talked to anyone who has built a Murphy Rebel? Here is a great plane on the same page (at least in my book) as the Comp series. I have found almost all I have talked to have taken over 1500 hrs just to rivet the fuselage together. Glasairs and Lancairs, if you really want fast rather than utility, take 2000 hours plus. Even the builders of the Glastar find it takes a minimum of 1500 hours to fly a basic layout. The Comp Monster can be built in about the same time as a Kitfox or Avid Flyer but you end up with a lot more plane for your time and your money. In my estimation, in the market for which the Comp series is designed, I think they really lock up their niche pretty well. NO, I don’t work for Comp Air.   – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The STOL capabilities of the Comp Air series are undoubtedly great. The cruise speeds leave something to be desired. From a composite airframe, I’d expect it to be faster.  The whole thing looks very boxy to me, nothing like the sleek lines you’d expect from a composite airplane.< As for the aircraft being boxy, it was intended to be that way. I was there when Ron Lueck started drawing the lines down to build molds. It was intended for ease of assembly for the customer, as well as ease of making the molds and producing the parts. Composite technologies are supposed to make it easy to produce the swoopy shapes required to make it go fast.  The dorsal side of the Comp Air is nicely swoopy, but the sides and bottom are straight, making it look like a box.  But yes, it probably does make it easier for the customer to join the parts up if the sides were straight. <I ordered their info pak and the video.  The video was 1 hour and 48 minutes long, but was a real amateur job.  The camera was a handheld, it was jerky and I actually got motion sick watching some parts of it!  I didn’t get a good feeling about the professionalism of the company from the stuff they put out. I worked for another company producing a different kitplane. Although I can understand from a customers’ standpoint how a video like that can affect your decision, please keep this in mind… Think of how many designs AeroComp has put out now since they started. We never achieved a great video either. Simply put, it is difficult to get together enough pilots, enough aircraft, a good day with acceptable weather for shooting (background light, clouds, etc). And with getting a professional camera person there at $300 for 4 hrs, it can get quite costly very quickly! Not to mention pulling everyone away from shop duties. I realize that it is costly to make a professional video.  But my own reaction to the quality of the Comp Air video was decidedly negative, and I would suspect that some people who would otherwise be enthusiastic prospects for the airplane get turned off by the video also.  I suggest that it may be in the interests of the company to reconsider sending out the video in the existing format. My point, don’t just judge from the surface, there is alot more to it than most realize. If you visit the factory, you won’t find Ron or Steve sitting in a office, like most owners. There out in the shop, right along side there workers…. Jim In my humble opinion, I think Aerocomp probably has a good product, especially in the floatplane category.  The company would do better to put its best foot forward, and the info pak and video that I got from them wasn’t up to snuff.  The exaggerated build time helped get my attention, but it ultimately turned me away when I found out the truth. stan Jim Ratte http://www.recreationalmobility.com/

– Bruce A. Frank, Editor               "Ford 3.8/4.2L Engine and V-6 STOL                                  | Publishing interesting material|                                  | on all aspects of alternative  |                                  | engines and homebuilt aircraft.|                (-o-)/        AIRCRAFT PROJECTS CO.                 ___/           Manufacturing parts & pieces                 /             for homebuilt aircraft,                0     0          TIG welding While trying to find the time to finish mine.

Response:

I started to keep my mouth shut here but

. . . In my estimation, in the market for which the Comp series is designed, I think they really lock up their niche pretty well.

Thank you Bruce – that was refreshing. Carl Stevens

Response:

Snipped a good review  - thanks much for the information, Stan. One of the key factorsfor us in narrowing to Aerocomp CA-6 is payload space (we’ll likely only install 4 seats) and the high wing option for a floatplane capability (we live on the water in BC.)  I fully agree that the video sent in the package was not professional, and I could not watch it all the way through.  I have heard the construction is however and will check this out personally. Design aesthetics are not what I’d have done, but it is one fairly efficient approach to getting the volume we like.  The feedback on build times is worrisome, and in conflict with others, I’ll dig more deeply in my visit and report back. Geoff Geoffrey M. Wood Profile Composites, Inc. Sidney, BC, Canada

Response:

The STOL capabilities of the Comp Air series are undoubtedly great.

The cruise speeds leave something to be desired. From a composite airframe, I’d expect it to be faster.  The whole thing looks very boxy to me, nothing like the sleek lines you’d expect from a composite airplane.< As for the aircraft being boxy, it was intended to be that way. I was there when Ron Lueck started drawing the lines down to build molds. It was intended for ease of assembly for the customer, as well as ease of making the molds and producing the parts. <I ordered their info pak and the video.  The video was 1 hour and 48 minutes long, but was a real amateur job.  The camera was a handheld, it was jerky and I actually got motion sick watching some parts of it!  I didn’t get a good feeling about the professionalism of the company from the stuff they put out. I worked for another company producing a different kitplane. Although I can understand from a customers’ standpoint how a video like that can affect your decision, please keep this in mind… Think of how many designs AeroComp has put out now since they started. We never achieved a great video either. Simply put, it is difficult to get together enough pilots, enough aircraft, a good day with acceptable weather for shooting (background light, clouds, etc). And with getting a professional camera person there at $300 for 4 hrs, it can get quite costly very quickly! Not to mention pulling everyone away from shop duties. My point, don’t just judge from the surface, there is alot more to it than most realize. If you visit the factory, you won’t find Ron or Steve sitting in a office, like most owners. There out in the shop, right along side there workers…. Jim Jim Ratte http://www.recreationalmobility.com/

Response:

Snipped a good review  - thanks much for the information, Stan. One of the key factorsfor us in narrowing to Aerocomp CA-6 is payload space (we’ll likely only install 4 seats) and the high wing option for a floatplane capability (we live on the water in BC.)  I fully agree that the video sent in the package was not professional, and I could not watch it all the way through.  I have heard the construction is however and will check this out personally.

If you want floatplane capabilities, then the choice does get narrowed down really fast to the Comp Air.  None of the other airplanes in my list will float – at least not for very long. From their literature, the payload capability is quite impressive at 1300 lbs.  So the Comp Air should fill your needs in those respects. Design aesthetics are not what I’d have done, but it is one fairly efficient approach to getting the volume we like.  The feedback on build times is worrisome, and in conflict with others, I’ll dig more deeply in my visit and report back.

I guess my problem was that the aircraft just doesn’t look sexy with its boxy structure.  This is strictly a personal feeling. If I was going to build an airplane, I want it to look good! The build time estimates for the Comp Air airplanes are definitely exaggerated.  What they quote aren’t the "average builder" times, but the time for an experienced shop team to build the airframe only.  Put an average joe in there, add in panel wiring time, engine installation, interior, finishing and painting, and I think that your times will be above 1000 hours at the very least. The build time number in Kitplanes was what caught my eye also. If it were true, it would have been a sure fire win.  I mean, a complete airplane in only 350 hours?  Wow! Please report back on what you see at the factory! Geoff Geoffrey M. Wood Profile Composites, Inc. Sidney, BC, Canada

stan

Response:

The STOL capabilities of the Comp Air series are undoubtedly great. The cruise speeds leave something to be desired. From a composite airframe, I’d expect it to be faster.  The whole thing looks very boxy to me, nothing like the sleek lines you’d expect from a composite airplane.< As for the aircraft being boxy, it was intended to be that way. I was there when Ron Lueck started drawing the lines down to build molds. It was intended for ease of assembly for the customer, as well as ease of making the molds and producing the parts.

Composite technologies are supposed to make it easy to produce the swoopy shapes required to make it go fast.  The dorsal side of the Comp Air is nicely swoopy, but the sides and bottom are straight, making it look like a box.  But yes, it probably does make it easier for the customer to join the parts up if the sides were straight.   <I ordered their info pak and the video.  The video was 1 hour and 48 minutes long, but was a real amateur job.  The camera was a handheld, it was jerky and I actually got motion sick watching some parts of it!  I didn’t get a good feeling about the professionalism of the company from the stuff they put out. I worked for another company producing a different kitplane. Although I can understand from a customers’ standpoint how a video like that can affect your decision, please keep this in mind… Think of how many designs AeroComp has put out now since they started. We never achieved a great video either. Simply put, it is difficult to get together enough pilots, enough aircraft, a good day with acceptable weather for shooting (background light, clouds, etc). And with getting a professional camera person there at $300 for 4 hrs, it can get quite costly very quickly! Not to mention pulling everyone away from shop duties.

I realize that it is costly to make a professional video.  But my own reaction to the quality of the Comp Air video was decidedly negative, and I would suspect that some people who would otherwise be enthusiastic prospects for the airplane get turned off by the video also.  I suggest that it may be in the interests of the company to reconsider sending out the video in the existing format. My point, don’t just judge from the surface, there is alot more to it than most realize. If you visit the factory, you won’t find Ron or Steve sitting in a office, like most owners. There out in the shop, right along side there workers…. Jim

In my humble opinion, I think Aerocomp probably has a good product, especially in the floatplane category.  The company would do better to put its best foot forward, and the info pak and video that I got from them wasn’t up to snuff.  The exaggerated build time helped get my attention, but it ultimately turned me away when I found out the truth. stan – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Jim Ratte http://www.recreationalmobility.com/

Response:

Question:

Does anyone have information on fly fishing in France in early September?  Any sources to look for?  My son and I would apreciate any help.

Response:

Try the travel agents/tourist pages on yahoo uk/Ireland we found some good Information on fly fishing in France. Best Regards & Tight lines Chris & Sue Simmons. U.K.         – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Does anyone have information on fly fishing in France in early September?  Any sources to look for?  My son and I would apreciate any help.

Response:

Assuming you haven’t left already — Where will you be?  I was in France in July and picked up a really helpful book called "Guide des Parcours de Peche en France" which lists almost every river and lake in detail.  I fished a number of rivers in northeastern France.  Full of wild fish but very tough fishing (v. low water in midsummer).  There is also a legendary fly fishing hotel in a small village called Goumois on the Swiss border (River Doubs).  I really enjoyed staying there, and prices are reasonable.  But it all depends where you plan to be — Normandy, for example, is full of classic English-style chalk streams.  E-mail me if you’d like more details and I’ll be happy to pass on tips from the book I mentioned.  Beware, by the way, of the incredibly complicated and bureaucratic licensing requirements — you basically have to buy a new license for each river, often each section of river, you intend to fish. Best wishes, George Black

Response:

Question:

Waders are primarily designed to keep you dry. A wet suit is primarily designed to keep you warm, but it can only do this efficiently if the layer of water between the suit and your body is not constantly changed, this layer of water warms to near body temperature and provides extra insulation, there is still heat loss, but it is more gradual, and the suit is "water conditioned" preventing sweat build up etc.  I used to dive in the English North sea  in winter, and our maximum time with a wet suit was about 40 minutes, any more than that and you  will be at serious risk of exposure and hypothermia ( as a matter of interest, without the suit you will almost certainly  be dead in less than fifteen minutes ! )   When diving with a neoprene  wet suit a heavy lead belt is required to overcome the buoyancy of the suit, or you will simply not be able to submerge. The amount of time you can spend in the water in a wet suit is very limited indeed ( see above ), you will eventually get very cold indeed, because while the heat loss is gradual, it is constant, and the effects of prolonged exposure to water, especially saltwater are extremely deleterious to the skin, and your body chemistry. If you wade in dangerous water, wherever it may be you ought to take sensible precautions. Suitable waders for the temperature of the water  ( if it

Question:

I don’t have ten favorite flies and I would be hard pressed to just to give you the names of 30 flies.  To me "favorite fly" means the one I like best, not 10 or 30.  My favorite dry fly is a modified Horner Deer Hair, which tells you nothing because you have no idea how I modify it.  Jack Horner is the inventor of the Humpy or Goofus Bug which is my next to my favorite dry fly.  My favorite wet fly is a Western Coachnan and my favorite streamer is one of Keith Fulshers flies from his book "Tying and Fishing the Thunder Creek Series". — Remove NOSPAM to send E-mail Ernie Harrison – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – PEOPLE! I didn’t want to know a 10 fly collection, I wanted to know your 10 favorite dries, your 10 favorite wets, your ten favorite nymphs, and your 10 favorite streamers. Bryce Carron Santa Fe, Texas

Response:

PEOPLE! I didn’t want to know a 10 fly collection, I wanted to know your 10 favorite dries, your 10 favorite wets, your ten favorite nymphs, and your 10 favorite streamers. Bryce Carron Santa Fe, Texas

PERSON !!   I do not want to tell you !   Harry

Response:

PEOPLE! I didn’t want to know a 10 fly collection, I wanted to know your 10 favorite dries, your 10 favorite wets, your ten favorite nymphs, and your 10 favorite streamers. Bryce Carron Santa Fe, Texas

Response:

PEOPLE! I didn’t want to know a 10 fly collection, I wanted to know your 10 favorite dries, your 10 favorite wets, your ten favorite nymphs, and your 10 favorite streamers.

Now you’re telling us the rules! My fly box isn’t that big, and I can’t remember all the names, just what works. 12 green ones, 16 black, 4 red, and 8 brown. Some are multi colored but who’s counting. — Doug Knight                           metalfab<atpacbell.net Junk e-mail, solicitation, sales, products and services gladly accepted at $500.00 per mailing and billed directly to your ISP.

Response:

Question:

Anyone know a decent flyshop in the Berkshires…for local advice and flytying materials.

Response:

If you are in the northern Berkshires, you might try the Smith and Morey shop on Route 2 in Charlemont.  The proprietor is a friendly guy and, along with one of his buddies, gave me some advice on the Deerfield last weekend.  The shop is a combination of hunting and fishing supplies, so the flyfishing/tying merchandise is not dazzling.  He said he would only be open on weekends after Christmas, but you can also check his main outdoor store (same name) just off of Route 2 in Shelburn Falls on the main street about a block away from the bridge crossing the Deerfield. Good luck! Rob Foster

Response:

Question:

I am wondering if there are any tricks to tying backing onto my reel then to my floating fly line?  It seems pretty straightforward, but I have noticed alot of talk about different fishermen’s reliance upon and use of backing. What’s the process.  Thanks for any troubleshooting tips.

Response:

I am wondering if there are any tricks to tying backing onto my reel then to my floating fly line?  It seems pretty straightforward, but I have noticed alot of talk about different fishermen’s reliance upon and use of backing. What’s the process.  Thanks for any troubleshooting tips.

You should ask this in rec.outdoors.fishing.fly, it will likely touch off a major discussion! First off, you definitely need backing, unless you plan to spend your time catching 4" trout that are 15ft away. What you use as backing is another matter. Some guys like to lay out $$$ for custom designed fly rod backing – I prefer to use an el cheapo alternative, black dacron line. It costs about 1/4 as much as real backing and is pretty much the same thing. The backing knot is another question entirely. The folks in r.o.f.f will talk about everything from nail knots at the high end down to modified versions of a sheet bend / figure eight combination called a backing knot. Best to do some reading at the library to see what’s the best for your purposes (ie what can you be bothered tying, and how important you think it is to your type of fishing). Good luck Rod

Response:

Question:

HELP!!! My wife is insisting on a family vacation this summer to a resort in Durango Colorado. Can anyone suggest places to fly fish nearby? Thanks in advance for your help. Duane

Response:

When in Rome… Be sure to check in with the fine folks at the Durangler fly shop

Response: