Question:
impossible to get any distance on the bigger pike flies, such as the rabbit hair diver (3/0 I think). I’ve probably neglected to take into account that I am using a 6wt, 9 ft
rod I am obviously missing posts again. C
Fly Fishing Fisherman Wiki » Fly Fishing » Rod for pike flies
impossible to get any distance on the bigger pike flies, such as the rabbit hair diver (3/0 I think). I’ve probably neglected to take into account that I am using a 6wt, 9 ft
rod I am obviously missing posts again. C
Fly Fishing Fisherman Wiki » Trout Fly Fishing » Using Fly Floatant is Unethical!
Just as using a strike indicator is unethical, so should the use of any artifical means of applying a substance to help keep your fly float as well. Many good flyfisherman that I have seen use a floating device not so much as to act as an indicator for strikes, but to simply keep their nymph at a proper distance to the bottom, and be able to correctly judge that their float is drag free. Pretty simple concept that any knowledgeable fisherman should be able to understand and appreciate. By the way, is that little "oil spill" that surrounds a fly covered with floatant toxic?
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Just as using a strike indicator is unethical, so should the use of any artifical means of applying a substance to help keep your fly float as well. Many good flyfisherman that I have seen use a floating device not so much as to act as an indicator for strikes, but to simply keep their nymph at a proper distance to the bottom, and be able to correctly judge that their float is drag free. Pretty simple concept that any knowledgeable fisherman should be able to understand and appreciate. By the way, is that little "oil spill" that surrounds a fly covered with floatant toxic?
Just as using a strike indicator is unethical, so should the use of any artifical means of applying a substance to help keep your fly float as well.
Just as unethical as it is to use a dry fly? I mean what is that after all but an indicator? 
— Warren Findley "The vice or virtue of any form of angling lies not in the method but in the man." Author Hugh Falkus
Just as using a strike indicator is unethical, so should the use of any artifical means of applying a substance to help keep your fly float as well. Many good flyfisherman that I have seen use a floating device not so much as to act as an indicator for strikes, but to simply keep their nymph at a proper distance to the bottom, and be able to correctly judge that their float is drag free. Pretty simple concept that any knowledgeable fisherman should be able to understand and appreciate. By the way, is that little "oil spill" that surrounds a fly covered with floatant toxic?
When you really get down to it, Bruce, just between you and me, every kind of fishing that people other than you and I do is unethical. — visit my web site: http://home.earthlink.net/~royalwulff/
Many good flyfisherman that I have seen use a floating device not so much as to act as an indicator for strikes, but to simply keep their nymph at a proper distance to the bottom, and be able to correctly judge that their float is drag free.
Righto, Smedley.
I’ll second that. Not trying to ruff too many feathers tonight, just wanted to make a point. I’ll await a response from any Master of fly flotant, and another question. Is it allowable to dress the last several inches of your fly line to keep it floating higher, to help with strike detection? Pretty simple concepts, but virtually one and the same. I find it hard to imagine that anyone could go opposite directions on the same concept, unless of course they didn’t have a strike indicator to market.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Just as using a strike indicator is unethical, so should the use of any artifical means of applying a substance to help keep your fly float as well. Many good flyfisherman that I have seen use a floating device not so much as to act as an indicator for strikes, but to simply keep their nymph at a proper distance to the bottom, and be able to correctly judge that their float is drag free. Pretty simple concept that any knowledgeable fisherman should be able to understand and appreciate. By the way, is that little "oil spill" that surrounds a fly covered with floatant toxic? When you really get down to it, Bruce, just between you and me, every kind of fishing that people other than you and I do is unethical. — visit my web site: http://home.earthlink.net/~royalwulff/
If you manage to troll-up a strike from our self-proclaimed Master Baiter, ask him how he feels about fly goop that is laced with fish oil… /daytripper (Whoops! Sorry about that imagery – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’ll second that. Not trying to ruff too many feathers tonight, just wanted to make a point. I’ll await a response from any Master of fly flotant, and another question. Is it allowable to dress the last several inches of your fly line to keep it floating higher, to help with strike detection? Pretty simple concepts, but virtually one and the same. I find it hard to imagine that anyone could go opposite directions on the same concept, unless of course they didn’t have a strike indicator to market. Just as using a strike indicator is unethical, so should the use of any artifical means of applying a substance to help keep your fly float as well. Many good flyfisherman that I have seen use a floating device not so much as to act as an indicator for strikes, but to simply keep their nymph at a proper distance to the bottom, and be able to correctly judge that their float is drag free. Pretty simple concept that any knowledgeable fisherman should be able to understand and appreciate. By the way, is that little "oil spill" that surrounds a fly covered with floatant toxic? When you really get down to it, Bruce, just between you and me, every kind of fishing that people other than you and I do is unethical. — visit my web site: http://home.earthlink.net/~royalwulff/
[snipped] By the way, is that little "oil spill" that surrounds a fly covered with floatant toxic?
That would be "Polyunsaturated Gerhke". /daytripper (Hell yes, it’s toxic!
I’ll second that. Not trying to ruff too many feathers tonight, just wanted to make a point. I’ll await a response from any Master of fly flotant, and another question. Is it allowable to dress the last several inches of your fly line to keep it floating higher, to help with strike detection? Pretty simple concepts, but virtually one and the same. I find it hard to imagine that anyone could go opposite directions on the same concept, unless of course they didn’t have a strike indicator to market.
Well, assuming that this isn’t a complete troll… Sorry, I’m no "Master of fly flotant," but am I permitted to ask questions? How does this rather interesting theory address silk lines, gut leaders, and the "fathers and mothers" of the sport? Or are you saying that it’s "unethical" if one were to "dress" something simply to help with strike detection? TC, R – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Just as using a strike indicator is unethical, so should the use of any artifical means of applying a substance to help keep your fly float as well. Many good flyfisherman that I have seen use a floating device not so much as to act as an indicator for strikes, but to simply keep their nymph at a proper distance to the bottom, and be able to correctly judge that their float is drag free. Pretty simple concept that any knowledgeable fisherman should be able to understand and appreciate. By the way, is that little "oil spill" that surrounds a fly covered with floatant toxic? When you really get down to it, Bruce, just between you and me, every kind of fishing that people other than you and I do is unethical. — visit my web site: http://home.earthlink.net/~royalwulff/
Just as using a strike indicator is unethical, so should the use of any artifical means of applying a substance to help keep your fly float as well. Many good flyfisherman that I have seen use a floating device not so much as to act as an indicator for strikes, but to simply keep their nymph at a proper distance to the bottom, and be able to correctly judge that their float is drag free. Pretty simple concept that any knowledgeable fisherman should be able to understand and appreciate. By the way, is that little "oil spill" that surrounds a fly covered with floatant toxic?
Holy Shit….a *direct* hit. Ya know…that fly line is pretty much a 90 foot bobber when it comes down to it. Well done. — Halfordian Golfer
Does the turned up nose and image of snobby fisherman come to mind…does here. Wonder if because I fish for a non trout species such as catfish, warm and cold water species out here rates the same… Time to lose the pipe the tweeds and get with the program. Its year 2000 not 1900. By the way though, if your preferences are without go right ahead. Your post was good for laugh here on an otherwise dreary saturday while we wait for the ice to melt so we can go wet a fly……with our strike indicators and all, ha ha
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Just as using a strike indicator is unethical, so should the use of any artifical means of applying a substance to help keep your fly float as well. Many good flyfisherman that I have seen use a floating device not so much as to act as an indicator for strikes, but to simply keep their nymph at a proper distance to the bottom, and be able to correctly judge that their float is drag free. Pretty simple concept that any knowledgeable fisherman should be able to understand and appreciate. By the way, is that little "oil spill" that surrounds a fly covered with floatant toxic?
Just as using a strike indicator is unethical, so should the use of any artifical means of applying a substance to help keep your fly float as well. Many good flyfisherman that I have seen use a floating device not so much as to act as an indicator for strikes, but to simply keep their nymph at a proper distance to the bottom, and be able to correctly judge that their float is drag free. Pretty simple concept that any knowledgeable fisherman should be able to understand and appreciate. By the way, is that little "oil spill" that surrounds a fly covered with floatant toxic?
I do more nymphing than dry fly fishing, and generally don’t bother with floatants (except for the mucilin for my leader). Nor do I bother with sinkants either. I certainly don’t use the bite indicators, as the leader is quite sufficient. I don’t bother with a dry fly dropper, as it is a general pain. I do like to use the singular fly though, as I fish primarily on small streams and sighting fish is the intended order of affairs. One accurate fly is all that is required, and it usually tends to be sub-surface. I would not like to say any bad words about the practice of using bite indicators, though I would say that I’d never like to use them. I like to fish using a greased leader in comparison, either of which are perfectly justified depending upon the relative viewpoint.
Many good flyfisherman that I have seen use a floating device not so much as to act as an indicator for strikes, but to simply keep their nymph at a proper distance to the bottom, and be able to correctly judge that their float is drag free. Righto, Smedley.
NOT SO. As long as you use only the free leader and fly line with no additional attachments, you are nymph fishing freely and fairly. One does NOT USE INDICATORS to determine how deep a run is. If you’re ticking along the bottom close enough, your nymph will come up with a caddis case on the barb or moss or both. I’m going to have to hold a "How To Dead Drift a Nymph" at the Western Conclave I suppose. I’ll even do it free of charge. You guys can use the money saved to buy some really good beer instead of that Bud Puke. zingggg! Did you get the #32 Sir Connelly?? — Mr.G. http://www.gink.com "the saga continues"
I’m going to have to hold a "How To Dead Drift a Nymph" at the Western Conclave I suppose. I’ll even do it free of charge. You guys can use the money saved to buy some really good beer instead of that Bud
Puke. LMAO! You are going to be taking a lesson in how to get spanked by me using a strike indicator on my home water! Perhaps I will give you some lessons after you spend all of your time rerigging your set up to get a decent drift through a constantly changing depth! You might as well just start calling me Daddy now, George <g — Warren Findley "The vice or virtue of any form of angling lies not in the method but in the man." Author Hugh Falkus
I’m going to have to hold a "How To Dead Drift a Nymph" at the Western Conclave I suppose.
I was going to give this clave a pass, to avoid the August YNP crowds, but I might change my mind just to watch you teaching nymphing to a group of ROFFians. I’ll even do it free of charge.
Hell, I’d even pay. JR
I’m going to have to hold a "How To Dead Drift a Nymph" at the Western Conclave I suppose. I’ll even do it free of charge. You guys can use the money saved to buy some really good beer instead of that Bud Puke. LMAO! You are going to be taking a lesson in how to get spanked by me using a strike indicator on my home water! Perhaps I will give you some lessons after you spend all of your time rerigging your set up to get a decent drift through a constantly changing depth! You might as well just start calling me Daddy now, George <g
He’ll be calling you Daddy by long distance, ‘cuz he won’t show…
It is not the floatant that is unethical, but the line, leader and tippet that are.
He’ll be calling you Daddy by long distance, ‘cuz he won’t show…
I don’t know. I am starting to wonder. . . . . He has assured me that he will and I hope he does. If I am in a good mood, I might even give him some pointers and a pocket full of strike indicators to use <g — Warren Findley "The vice or virtue of any form of angling lies not in the method but in the man." Author Hugh Falkus
NO Indicators Warren. — (C) George Gehrke 2001 http://www.gink.com/shopcart/index.html fine bamboo flyrods & blanks
Why on earth is this stuff ‘unethical’? We fish. We catch. We eat. The food chain works. Just how far up your ass is your head stuck? regards, eric pearson – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Just as using a strike indicator is unethical, so should the use of any artifical means of applying a substance to help keep your fly float as well. Many good flyfisherman that I have seen use a floating device not so much as to act as an indicator for strikes, but to simply keep their nymph at a proper distance to the bottom, and be able to correctly judge that their float is drag free. Pretty simple concept that any knowledgeable fisherman should be able to understand and appreciate. By the way, is that little "oil spill" that surrounds a fly covered with floatant toxic?
Why on earth is this stuff ‘unethical’? We fish. We catch. We eat. The food chain works. Just how far up your ass is your head stuck?
We fish. We catch. We release. We dump all over the next guy who catches the fish, should it survive. — visit my web site: http://home.earthlink.net/~royalwulff/
Obviously not as far up as yours if you couldn’t understand that I was being satirical. We fish, we catch, we eat, and the stocking truck brings more "quality" fish. Have fun, and hope you choke on a bone while alone.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Why on earth is this stuff ‘unethical’? We fish. We catch. We eat. The food chain works. Just how far up your ass is your head stuck? regards, eric pearson Just as using a strike indicator is unethical, so should the use of any artifical means of applying a substance to help keep your fly float as well. Many good flyfisherman that I have seen use a floating device not so much as to act as an indicator for strikes, but to simply keep their nymph at a proper distance to the bottom, and be able to correctly judge that their float is drag free. Pretty simple concept that any knowledgeable fisherman should be able to understand and appreciate. By the way, is that little "oil spill" that surrounds a fly covered with floatant toxic?
NO Indicators Warren.
But plenty of "Dr. Gink" brand fish oil…
But plenty of "Dr. Gink" brand fish oil…
You would think he would support indicators since they would require the use of his product. . . . — Warren Findley "The vice or virtue of any form of angling lies not in the method but in the man." Author Hugh Falkus
I do care how money is created. Greed at the cost of breaking fly fishing standards of old doesn’t interest me. I would rather hold the standard of fly fishing ethics up, not lower them. To Wit: "I might as well do it because everyone else does." To Wit: "If I don’t clear cut this national forest, some one else will." To Wit: "I’m not going to return this wallet because the owner doesn’t know I have it." To Wit: "I use a tree stand because it works and I want the advantage." To Wit: "Let’s crucify Jesus Christ because mobs are right." (and they did) To Wit: "When Jesus drove the money changers away, it proved he was a loser" To Wit: "All people will give into corrupt concepts if it involves losing money." You would think, since 90% of the time trout feed UNDER WATER, fly fishermen would keep the playing field level, wouldn’t you? Each year, there are more and more fly fishermen and less waters to share. If you don’t believe what the future is being held out for all you Roffians, go to the Big Horn this year. There isn’t a fish there that you cannot call, "Scarface". Fair chase doesn’t exist astream with indicators. Sure, Gink is the thing to use on all indicators. It doesn’t mean I have to give up a view in terms of wildlife’s best interests above my own. I have never fished with an indicator in my entire life. It’s a matter of personal choice in my humble opinion. But plenty of "Dr. Gink" brand fish oil… You would think he would support indicators since they would require the use of his product. . . .
(C) George Gehrke 2001 http://www.gink.com/shopcart/index.html fine bamboo flyrods & blanks
Fly Fishing Fisherman Wiki » Fly Fishing » too much weather information !
There is plenty of ice out there. Here on the West Coast it occurs from now until spring. Usually below 15,000. The leagality issue is the source of endless debate. The big question is what constitutes "known icing conditions". The opinions lately have been swinging toward forcast icing as being "known icing".
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’m just a VFR studying for the written but I’ll take a stab: First, why would you go VFR if you’ve got the rating? Icing conditions are fairly predictable. Be on the lookout for ice and have an out if things get touchy. Simple as that . . . right? In any case, you’ll know weather there’s ice in them thar clouds one or two days before the trip. Just ’cause there’s clouds doesn’t mean there’s ice. Actual ice certainly may be rare. However, it is illegal to fly in icing conditions. If you have airmet zulu, and you fly above the icing level in that airmet, and you either fly in visible moisture, or get rained on, you are flying in known ice conditions. — I can’t do it. So you can’t do it either. QED.
Airmet Zulu usually has an altitude range attached to it, ie. "occasional moderate icing between freezing level and FL180". You can sometimes get slightly above the airmet. I’ve seen Airmet Zulu with tops at 14,000 on a number of occasions. I don’t know how they come up with that, weather it’s determined by temperatures aloft or the estimtated tops of the clouds.
Either or both, I would guess. In Severe Weather Flying (which I strongly recommend) Dennis Newton suggests that the freezing band in stratiform cloud is rarely more than 3000 ft thick, and in convective cloud rarely more than 6000 ft thick. Above that level, the temperature is low enough so that the concentration of supercooled water droplets is low (they’re already ice). The Airmet may not be able to place that actual freezing band accurately, so it covers a deeper band. I wouldn’t want to bet my life on the freezing band being only 3000 ft thick: the Mooney I fly is about the worst icing-test-aircraft that I can imagine, and I’m certainly not tempted to try to climb through 3000 ft of freezing cloud to find out. But it’s a useful thing to have in your mind if you encounter icing. Julian Scarfe
I sort of feel that I, (in my Cessna 182 non ice approved) should deal with ice as you would with thunderstorms. Stay VFR whenever it’s subfreezing so you can see your options and see the situation ahead and behind.
Some would say that’s overly conservative. They’re wrong. Actually, in a relatively high performance single like yours, you might consider poking your nose in to take a look, provided you have good options for what to do if your nose gets frostbit. A C-182, if not too heavily loaded, has enough engine to carry some ice so if you get out of the icing quickly you should be OK. That’s about it, though. If you have no options for getting out of the icing quickly, you have no business even sticking your nose in it. And if you don’t have a high performance airplane, you have no business sticking your nose in even if you can get out quickly, because the ice will bog you down fast. And if you’re on top, don’t let the undercast close below you unless you know there are plenty of breaks in the clouds within you’re fuel range.
As I once discovered, that’s not sufficient to stay safe. It’s fine if you are above the undercast and still have plenty of performance to go higher, but if you’re pretty much maxed out (your climb rate is down below 500 fpm where you are cruising) exactly what are you planning to do if the tops rise? They can, you know. I got caught that way once myself. In a way, it seems safer on top as long as you can get there and down without having to penetrate freezing clouds. I’m not so sure about the whole route below the deck. Low visibility I heard can make ice by itself, and you could get some bad precip.
Low vis does not make ice. Precip can. I don’t want to be one of those who have had to land with a glazed over windshield peeking out the side window. … Aaron
No, you don’t. I came damn close myself a couple of times, and both times I thought I could make the flight VFR (once above the clouds, once below them). Michael
You’re welcome. I really did not mean to come down hard on you. It’s just that I used to believe what you believe, and that very nearly got me killed.
Excellent recount of your inadvertent adventure, man. And scary as hell. Thanks for takin the time. — Jim Fisher North Alabama Cherokee 180
So by quickly, you might say you could consider trying to get on top when the overcast is only reported to be 500 feet thick stratus and no pireps of mod or greater icing??
Something like that. See, here’s the scenario. MEA’s are 5000 ft. Tops are 4000, freezing level is 3000, and I can count on a climb rate of 1000+ fpm up through 7000. Under those circumstances, I might be willing to give it a go, provided I could get back in to where I was going without having to climb to the MEA. Remember the MSA around your departure airport, and think about how you would get back in if you stick your nose in and it gets frostbit. In a situation where icing was possible but wasn’t being reported, and the MOCA was below the freezing level, I might even be tempted to give it a shot going through the potential ice unless people were reporting icing. The idea is that I have LORAN and GPS on board, and the GPS has a power source independent of the aircraft, and the odds that I’ll be forced to descend below the freezing level (to the MOCA, where I still won’t hit anything) AND the LORAN or electrical system goes out on me AND the GPS goes out on me are so long as not to be worth considering. So push come to shove, I can descend. This is all a risk management game – how much has to go wrong before you run out of options? If you postulate enough simultaneous failures, eventually you have nothing left to work with and you die. But the fact is, for two independednt things to fail on the same flight, you need to be having a really bad day, so I don’t worry about it. Ice forming when it wasn’t forecast even though there is visible moisture and temperatures below freezing? That’s not all that common, but not unexpected either. If you don’t plan for that you’re a moron. Electrical failure? Same deal. Both in one day? Pretty damn remote. Handheld GPS going at the same time? Man, it just wasn’t your day. See what I’m getting at? The idea is this – if you have visible moisture and are in subfreezing conditions, ice can form. If all your outs depend on ice not forming somewhere under those conditions, you’re kidding yourself. You need an out that involves either getting to where it’s above freezing or getting to where there is no visible moisture, and getting there QUICKLY. In general, if you’re on the East or West coast in winter, or in the mountains any time of year, and you have a need to fly IFR (meaning the weather won’t let you get there VFR) then you need deice. Or you can take your chances. Sure, there are days that are exceptions, but that’s the general rule. I guess maybe I should be able to see the ground through the clouds on a continuous basis as I fly enroute on top, then if the tops rise above my abilities, I can descend through a hole in the undercast.
Well, how far do your abilities stretch? This is what I mean by being where you can still climb 500 fpm. Face it, tops are not very likely to rise more than 500 fpm. Also, if you can still do 500 fpm where you are, odds are you can go another 5000 ft up with little trouble. The tops are not likely to go that much higher everywhere at once. A lightly loaded C-182 should still be doing 500 fpm up at 7000 ft. I thought I heard it said on this group, that low visibility can indeed cause icing by itself. 1SM in haze or whatever.
If the haze is thick enough to reduce the vis to 1 sm, well, maybe. That takes A LOT of moisture, maybe enough that it might start to come out as ice. But I’ve yet to see visibility that poor without ceilings so low as to make going under anywhere but wide-open Midwest (and maybe even not there anymore, what with all the towers going up) way too scary even for me. Michael
Actual ice certainly may be rare. However, it is illegal to fly in icing conditions. If you have airmet zulu, and you fly above the icing level in that airmet, and you either fly in visible moisture, or get rained on, you are flying in known ice conditions.
Airmet Zulu usually has an altitude range attached to it, ie. "occasional moderate icing between freezing level and FL180". You can sometimes get slightly above the airmet. I’ve seen Airmet Zulu with tops at 14,000 on a number of occasions. I don’t know how they come up with that, weather it’s determined by temperatures aloft or the estimtated tops of the clouds.
Wrong. Very, very wrong. The only thing predictable about ice is that you can’t get it if there’s no visible moisture or the temperature is above freezing. Period. There’s snow, there’s rain then there’s icing conditions. They are all mutually exclusive NO THEY ARE NOT. Believing that nearly caused me to crash a Tomahawk with my girlfriend on board, and if I had been a little slower to react,
Which is why I placed the disclaimer that I was a VFR pilot at the beginning. I know I have lots to learn and was fishing for a response like yours. Thanks for your observations! — Jim Fisher North Alabama Cherokee 180
Actual ice is not rare. You will find ice in virtually every cloud below 0C on the West Coast. There are plenty of places with ice-free clouds around 0C but they are generally not near the coast. Mike MU-2 – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’m just a VFR studying for the written but I’ll take a stab: First, why would you go VFR if you’ve got the rating? Icing conditions are fairly predictable. Be on the lookout for ice and have an out if things get touchy. Simple as that . . . right? In any case, you’ll know weather there’s ice in them thar clouds one or two days before the trip. Just ’cause there’s clouds doesn’t mean there’s ice. Actual ice certainly may be rare. However, it is illegal to fly in icing conditions. If you have airmet zulu, and you fly above the icing level in that airmet, and you either fly in visible moisture, or get rained on, you are flying in known ice conditions. — I can’t do it. So you can’t do it either. QED.
A C-182, if not too heavily loaded, has enough engine to carry some ice so if you get out of the icing quickly you should be OK. That’s about it, though. If you have no options for getting out of the icing quickly, you have no business even sticking your nose in it
So by quickly, you might say you could consider trying to get on top when the overcast is only reported to be 500 feet thick stratus and no pireps of mod or greater icing?? I remember my first solo IMC. I plunged into the clouds on climbout, expection to be IMC all the way to my destination, only to pop out on top within 30 seconds. (not in winter of course) What a beautiful sight! And if you’re on top, don’t let the undercast close below you unless you know there are plenty of breaks in the clouds within you’re fuel range. As I once discovered, that’s not sufficient to stay safe. It’s fine if you are above the undercast and still have plenty of performance to go higher, but if you’re pretty much maxed out (your climb rate is down below 500 fpm where you are cruising) exactly what are you planning to do if the tops rise? They can, you know. I got caught that way once myself.
I guess maybe I should be able to see the ground through the clouds on a continuous basis as I fly enroute on top, then if the tops rise above my abilities, I can descend through a hole in the undercast. Low vis does not make ice. Precip can.
I thought I heard it said on this group, that low visibility can indeed cause icing by itself. 1SM in haze or whatever. … Aaron
I know it is illegal to fly into know icing conditions without deicing equipment. But that does not prohibit me from flying over it or under it right?
For the legal aspects I recommend http://www.avweb.com/articles/icingb/index.html But then I’ve very rarely paid much attention to the FARs myself. Paul Bertorelli’s article in November’s IFR is also well worth a read. It sent shivers down my spine. I have that T-shirt… Julian Scarfe
I got "page could not be found" on the sites you mentioned, but I think they are here now. http://www.awc-kc.noaa.gov/awc/vvice.html and http://www.awc-kc.noaa.gov/awc/nnice.html I also like http://www.rap.ucar.edu/largedrop/integrated/index.html and http://www.rap.ucar.edu/largedrop/ nice cloud tops graphs and icing reports and "ice at your intended altitude". Also the ADDS java pireps and airmets at http://adds.awc-kc.noaa.gov/projects/adds/index.html also look under the ADDS satellite icon and do the "forecast clouds" thing for your altitude. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –
There’s snow, there’s rain then there’s icing conditions. They are all mutually exclusive NO THEY ARE NOT. Believing that nearly caused me to crash a Tomahawk with my girlfriend on board, and if I had been a little slower to react, Which is why I placed the disclaimer that I was a VFR pilot at the beginning. I know I have lots to learn and was fishing for a response like yours.
The scary part is that I was a low time VFR-only pilot when I was rapidly disabused of my misconceptions. Story follows. It was a winter day in Inidiana, and I wanted to fly. My girlfriend wanted to eat. I convinced her that it would be fun to go to Rochester (IN) where there was a nice restaurant right across the street from the airport. The weather was 8000OVC and 10 mile vis – good VFR by anyone’s estimation. When I got my briefing the briefer warned me about icing in clouds. I pointed out that I was a VFR pilot in a VFR airplane and not planning to be in any clouds. He told me I’d be fine. Now icing is usually most severe at temperatures above zero – the air in subzero clouds is usually too dry for any significant icing to occur. The bases were at 8000 ft, and the ground temperatures were subfreezing. This SHOULD have clued me in about the inversion, but I was a low time VFR-only pilot and missed the cue. (For our European readers, I refer to zero F, which is about -18C) The Tomahawk I rented had the 125 hp engine. The advantage was that in the cool winter air, the bigger engine was just the ticket to get us to a comfortable cruising altitude quickly. The disadvantage was that at full power it was a thirsty beast, and for W&B reasons I elected to depart with a less than full load of fuel. I estimated that I had about 3 hours, and the round trip would take about 1.5 hours at the power settings I would be using. That seemed like a comfortable safety margin for day-VFR flying. The trip out and the lunch were uneventful, I hit my chekpoints perfectly, and lunch was good. The trip back started out just fine. Then I flew into a light rain shower. It was very light, and I could see right through it, so I really did not realize anything was wrong until I was in it. Then I noticed (and this all happened in a matter of seconds) that the horizon was going away. No, it was not a case of inadvertent VFR-into-IMC. There was a layer of clear ice building on my windshield. I made an immediate turn out of the shower. I expect my total time in the rain was only about a minute. But by the time I was out of it, I was at full throttle, only a little above Vy, and was gaining MAYBE 50-100 ft/min. I also could not see through my windshield because it, like the wings, was carrying a load of clear ice. Also, at full throttle, I now had less than an hour of fuel. I was lucky and I kept my head. I got help from ATC, the ice eventually sublimated off (but I had a plan that would, I think, have worked even with the ice – I was getting vectors to the 10,000+ ft runway at Grissom AFB), and I made an uneventful landing with about 30 minutes of fuel in my tanks. Had I crashed, no doubt I would have gotten a 90 for flying in known icing conditions. Thanks for your observations!
You’re welcome. I really did not mean to come down hard on you. It’s just that I used to believe what you believe, and that very nearly got me killed. Here’s another observation – weather is the most complex and open-ended area of pilot knowledge. The amount of weather knowledge that the average pilot has when he is given a ticket is pretty minimal. Unsurprisingly, it is also the major player in airplane crashes. Michael
There is nothing in Part 91 that specifically addresses flight in icing conditions (ignoring, of course, 91.527 which does not apply to most newsgroupies). The legal problem arises from 91.9, which refers to restrictions in the manual for the aircraft. I think common sense is a wonderful substitute for regulation, however. Bob Gardner – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Allow me to express my interest in this thread as well. There are many sources about icing with respect to the types of icing and the specific local conditions in which they occur. However, I am looking for sources that discuss icing from a more general stand point. Types of area forecasts to avoid. I know it is illegal to fly into know icing conditions without deicing equipment. But that does not prohibit me from flying over it or under it right? Aaron, My suggestion is don’t fly over the adirondak mountains in challenging conditions. North East of Syracuse, it gets sparse quickly. If you have to cross over the ADK’s do so using SLK (Saranac Lake) at least it will keep you over route 3 and away from the biggest mountains most of the time. The northern route (along route 11 through Malone) is better (no mountains). The southern route (east Albany and then north to Burlington on VT side so you don’t cross over much of Lake Champlain) is the safest since stays over major highways and doesn’t cross over mountains. Since your from Detroit, pack warmly in case you have to put down. There has to be snow on the ADK mountains by now. Cheers, Paul I’m planning a trip from Detroit area to Burlington Vermont if a few weeks in our club 182. I look at the weather each day and take a guess at what my go/no-go odds would be. With icing potential it gets pretty confusing with many options to consider! I’ve been looking at staying under the clouds VFR along low country and over lots of airports in case I need a quick out. Then I look (instead) at climbing through a holes in the broken or scattered layer and going on top. (if it looks like lots of openings for my descent at my destination) I have a few questions: 1. Since I don’t want to mess with freezing clouds is it usually best to go VFR? 2. If there is some precip along the route, and it’s reported either snow or rain, how do I know I’m not going to get some nasty freezing rain between stations? Is it best to no-go when there is some precip along the route with just above freezing surface temps? (even though there is no warm front in the area) 3. At what point does lower visibility raise the potential of ice. (I’m cruising under the deck at near freezing with no precip, but the visibility is 4 miles) Sorry for all the questions, but this is my first instrument rated winter. I have no experience in this stuff. … Aaron P.S. take today the 17th at 10z. Flying under the overcast would probably scare me off with the precip and some MVFR-IFR. But if the sky breaks up enough to depart through a hole, I could go on top with tops below 8000 and take one of the openings that show near my destination, with my out NW MA. (lots of fuel with long range tanks)
Two sites that you can check out for unofficial guidance (they are experimental) are www.awc-kc.noaa.gov/nnice.html and www.awc-kc.noaa.gov/vvice. Bob Gardner – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’m planning a trip from Detroit area to Burlington Vermont if a few weeks in our club 182. I look at the weather each day and take a guess at what my go/no-go odds would be. With icing potential it gets pretty confusing with many options to consider! I’ve been looking at staying under the clouds VFR along low country and over lots of airports in case I need a quick out. Then I look (instead) at climbing through a holes in the broken or scattered layer and going on top. (if it looks like lots of openings for my descent at my destination) I have a few questions: 1. Since I don’t want to mess with freezing clouds is it usually best to go VFR? 2. If there is some precip along the route, and it’s reported either snow or rain, how do I know I’m not going to get some nasty freezing rain between stations? Is it best to no-go when there is some precip along the route with just above freezing surface temps? (even though there is no warm front in the area) 3. At what point does lower visibility raise the potential of ice. (I’m cruising under the deck at near freezing with no precip, but the visibility is 4 miles) Sorry for all the questions, but this is my first instrument rated winter. I have no experience in this stuff. … Aaron P.S. take today the 17th at 10z. Flying under the overcast would probably scare me off with the precip and some MVFR-IFR. But if the sky breaks up enough to depart through a hole, I could go on top with tops below 8000 and take one of the openings that show near my destination, with my out NW MA. (lots of fuel with long range tanks)
I sort of feel that I, (in my Cessna 182 non ice approved) should deal with ice as you would with thunderstorms. Stay VFR whenever it’s subfreezing so you can see your options and see the situation ahead and behind. And if you’re on top, don’t let the undercast close below you unless you know there are plenty of breaks in the clouds within you’re fuel range. In a way, it seems safer on top as long as you can get there and down without having to penetrate freezing clouds. I’m not so sure about the whole route below the deck. Low visibility I heard can make ice by itself, and you could get some bad precip. I don’t want to be one of those who have had to land with a glazed over windshield peeking out the side window. … Aaron – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I have seen conditions when one could travel VFR under the cloud deck when one could not travel IFR in the clouds.
1. Since I don’t want to mess with freezing clouds is it usually best to go VFR?
I’m just a VFR studying for the written but I’ll take a stab: First, why would you go VFR if you’ve got the rating? Icing conditions are fairly predictable. Be on the lookout for ice and have an out if things get touchy. Simple as that . . . right? In any case, you’ll know weather there’s ice in them thar clouds one or two days before the trip. Just ’cause there’s clouds doesn’t mean there’s ice. 2. If there is some precip along the route, and it’s reported either snow or rain, how do I know I’m not going to get some nasty freezing rain between stations?
There’s snow, there’s rain then there’s icing conditions. They are all mutually exclusive and you won’t know anything concrete until a couple days before the trip. Is it best to no-go when there is some precip along the route with just above freezing surface temps? (even though there is no warm front in the area)
Naw! It’s best to no go if your chances are not good for reaching your required alternate or if your credit card is maxed out (a healthy credit card is a FAR regulation case you didn’t know) 3. At what point does lower visibility raise the potential of ice. (I’m cruising under the deck at near freezing with no precip, but the visibility is 4 miles)
It doesn’t. There’s snow. There’s rain. There’s bad visibility then there’s icing conditions. All depends on the moisture content and temperature and dewpoint. You can have cold and wet without ice and ice without cold. The question to me would be, can I get to a decent alternate or not? If not, you don’t go. — Jim Fisher North Alabama Cherokee 180
NO THEY ARE NOT. Believing that nearly caused me to crash a Tomahawk with my girlfriend on board, and if I had been a little slower to react, I would have been just another statistic. Michael
You expect us to trust your judgement when you willingly flew a Traumahawk ? Kidding. Agreed with everything you said. — I can’t do it. So you can’t do it either. QED.
I’m just a VFR studying for the written but I’ll take a stab: First, why would you go VFR if you’ve got the rating? Icing conditions are fairly predictable. Be on the lookout for ice and have an out if things get touchy. Simple as that . . . right? In any case, you’ll know weather there’s ice in them thar clouds one or two days before the trip. Just ’cause there’s clouds doesn’t mean there’s ice.
Actual ice certainly may be rare. However, it is illegal to fly in icing conditions. If you have airmet zulu, and you fly above the icing level in that airmet, and you either fly in visible moisture, or get rained on, you are flying in known ice conditions. — I can’t do it. So you can’t do it either. QED.
2. If there is some precip along the route, and it’s reported either snow or rain, how do I know I’m not going to get some nasty freezing rain between stations? Is it best to no-go when there is some precip along the route with just above freezing surface temps? (even though there is no warm front in the area)
Here’s about the extent of my cloud physics… You never *know* that you’re not going to get freezing rain, but without an inversion it’s unlikely. If precip is forming above the freezing level it’s usually as ice. As it falls into warmer temperatures below the freezing level it melts. Neither are necessarily problems, over and above what you’d expecting the same cloud without the precip; the formation of precip above the freezing level can actually be a good sign, as it may be a sign that the cloud is glaciating (turning from supercooled liquid drops into ice particles). The danger comes where precipitation falls from warmer temperatures above as rain into a sub-zero layer at lower levels. That’s freezing rain. In my part of the world (UK), it’s an infrequent scenario, but it certainly can happen. In the mid-US, where there’s less water around to keep the lower levels warm in winter, it’s probably a more frequent occurrence. Precipitation does, however, indicate that the cloud tops are higher than they otherwise would be, if it’s convective. In my limited experience some of the worst icing conditions are the tops of building cumulus which have not yet started producing much precip. Julian Scarfe
Thanks. This is helpful. -pw – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I have seen conditions when one could travel VFR under the cloud deck when one could not travel IFR in the clouds. In fact this is the norm in the northern half of the country for about half the year… It is because the MEA puts you into the ice, whereas there is no ice under the clouds, not cold enough. It hardly matters what the temperature is under the clouds – you need both below-freesing temperatures AND visible moisture for icing to happen. Unless it rains, you are safe below the clouds. You CAN get icing VFR. What it takes is an inversion. You fly in the clear, below the clouds, in subfreeezing temperatures. Rain falls above you, where it’s warmer, and the supercooled water hits your airplane and sticks as ice. Been there, done that, it sucked. First, why would you go VFR if you’ve got the rating? Icing conditions are fairly predictable. Be on the lookout for ice and have an out if things get touchy. Simple as that . . . right? Wrong. Very, very wrong. The only thing predictable about ice is that you can’t get it if there’s no visible moisture or the temperature is above freezing. Period. If you are flying in clouds and the temperature is below freezing, you are taking your chances whether icing is predicted or not. We used to have a regular on this newsgroup who nearly got himself and his family killed by taking off into such conditions in an underpowered light single when there was no icing forecast. That’s not to say people don’t do it – but every year we lose a few who do, and scare the bejeezus out of many more. In any case, you’ll know weather there’s ice in them thar clouds one or two days before the trip. Just ’cause there’s clouds doesn’t mean there’s ice. If there are clouds and it’s below freezing, there may be. You won’t know until you fly through them. You certainly won’t know days in advance. Further, with a typical light single, once you start building ice your options become VERY limited. Here’s a rule of thumb – if at your cruising altitude you can’t manage a 500 fpm climb, then odds are if you start picking up ice you can’t escape it by going up. Your options are going down (better hope it gets above freezing above the MEA) or turning around and going back to where the ice wasn’t building (better hope the weather hasn’t changed – it may be no better behind than ahead). Icing is poorly understood. Icing forecasts are largely experimental. If you go into the clouds at subfreezing temperatures and are not prepared to deal with icing at any time, well, you’re just kidding yourself. There’s snow, there’s rain then there’s icing conditions. They are all mutually exclusive NO THEY ARE NOT. Believing that nearly caused me to crash a Tomahawk with my girlfriend on board, and if I had been a little slower to react, I would have been just another statistic. Michael
Allow me to express my interest in this thread as well. There are many sources about icing with respect to the types of icing and the specific local conditions in which they occur. However, I am looking for sources that discuss icing from a more general stand point. Types of area forecasts to avoid. I know it is illegal to fly into know icing conditions without deicing equipment. But that does not prohibit me from flying over it or under it right? Aaron, My suggestion is don’t fly over the adirondak mountains in challenging conditions. North East of Syracuse, it gets sparse quickly. If you have to cross over the ADK’s do so using SLK (Saranac Lake) at least it will keep you over route 3 and away from the biggest mountains most of the time. The northern route (along route 11 through Malone) is better (no mountains). The southern route (east Albany and then north to Burlington on VT side so you don’t cross over much of Lake Champlain) is the safest since stays over major highways and doesn’t cross over mountains. Since your from Detroit, pack warmly in case you have to put down. There has to be snow on the ADK mountains by now. Cheers, Paul – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I’m planning a trip from Detroit area to Burlington Vermont if a few weeks in our club 182. I look at the weather each day and take a guess at what my go/no-go odds would be. With icing potential it gets pretty confusing with many options to consider! I’ve been looking at staying under the clouds VFR along low country and over lots of airports in case I need a quick out. Then I look (instead) at climbing through a holes in the broken or scattered layer and going on top. (if it looks like lots of openings for my descent at my destination) I have a few questions: 1. Since I don’t want to mess with freezing clouds is it usually best to go VFR? 2. If there is some precip along the route, and it’s reported either snow or rain, how do I know I’m not going to get some nasty freezing rain between stations? Is it best to no-go when there is some precip along the route with just above freezing surface temps? (even though there is no warm front in the area) 3. At what point does lower visibility raise the potential of ice. (I’m cruising under the deck at near freezing with no precip, but the visibility is 4 miles) Sorry for all the questions, but this is my first instrument rated winter. I have no experience in this stuff. … Aaron P.S. take today the 17th at 10z. Flying under the overcast would probably scare me off with the precip and some MVFR-IFR. But if the sky breaks up enough to depart through a hole, I could go on top with tops below 8000 and take one of the openings that show near my destination, with my out NW MA. (lots of fuel with long range tanks)
I have seen conditions when one could travel VFR under the cloud deck when one could not travel IFR in the clouds.
In fact this is the norm in the northern half of the country for about half the year… It is because the MEA puts you into the ice, whereas there is no ice under the clouds, not cold enough.
It hardly matters what the temperature is under the clouds – you need both below-freesing temperatures AND visible moisture for icing to happen. Unless it rains, you are safe below the clouds. You CAN get icing VFR. What it takes is an inversion. You fly in the clear, below the clouds, in subfreeezing temperatures. Rain falls above you, where it’s warmer, and the supercooled water hits your airplane and sticks as ice. Been there, done that, it sucked. First, why would you go VFR if you’ve got the rating? Icing conditions are fairly predictable. Be on the lookout for ice and have an out if things get touchy. Simple as that . . . right?
Wrong. Very, very wrong. The only thing predictable about ice is that you can’t get it if there’s no visible moisture or the temperature is above freezing. Period. If you are flying in clouds and the temperature is below freezing, you are taking your chances whether icing is predicted or not. We used to have a regular on this newsgroup who nearly got himself and his family killed by taking off into such conditions in an underpowered light single when there was no icing forecast. That’s not to say people don’t do it – but every year we lose a few who do, and scare the bejeezus out of many more. In any case, you’ll know weather there’s ice in them thar clouds one or two days before the trip. Just ’cause there’s clouds doesn’t mean there’s
ice. If there are clouds and it’s below freezing, there may be. You won’t know until you fly through them. You certainly won’t know days in advance. Further, with a typical light single, once you start building ice your options become VERY limited. Here’s a rule of thumb – if at your cruising altitude you can’t manage a 500 fpm climb, then odds are if you start picking up ice you can’t escape it by going up. Your options are going down (better hope it gets above freezing above the MEA) or turning around and going back to where the ice wasn’t building (better hope the weather hasn’t changed – it may be no better behind than ahead). Icing is poorly understood. Icing forecasts are largely experimental. If you go into the clouds at subfreezing temperatures and are not prepared to deal with icing at any time, well, you’re just kidding yourself. There’s snow, there’s rain then there’s icing conditions. They are all mutually exclusive
NO THEY ARE NOT. Believing that nearly caused me to crash a Tomahawk with my girlfriend on board, and if I had been a little slower to react, I would have been just another statistic. Michael
I have seen conditions when one could travel VFR under the cloud deck when one could not travel IFR in the clouds. It is because the MEA puts you into the ice, whereas there is no ice under the clouds, not cold enough. For example 2000′ overcast, 6 degrees C on the ground, will usually be above freezing right up to the cloud deck. In the clouds, it is freezing. Tops are high, say 10000AGL. Fairly common actually. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – 1. Since I don’t want to mess with freezing clouds is it usually best to go VFR? I’m just a VFR studying for the written but I’ll take a stab: First, why would you go VFR if you’ve got the rating? Icing conditions are fairly predictable. Be on the lookout for ice and have an out if things get touchy. Simple as that . . . right? In any case, you’ll know weather there’s ice in them thar clouds one or two days before the trip. Just ’cause there’s clouds doesn’t mean there’s ice. 2. If there is some precip along the route, and it’s reported either snow or rain, how do I know I’m not going to get some nasty freezing rain between stations? There’s snow, there’s rain then there’s icing conditions. They are all mutually exclusive and you won’t know anything concrete until a couple days before the trip. Is it best to no-go when there is some precip along the route with just above freezing surface temps? (even though there is no warm front in the area) Naw! It’s best to no go if your chances are not good for reaching your required alternate or if your credit card is maxed out (a healthy credit card is a FAR regulation case you didn’t know) 3. At what point does lower visibility raise the potential of ice. (I’m cruising under the deck at near freezing with no precip, but the visibility is 4 miles) It doesn’t. There’s snow. There’s rain. There’s bad visibility then there’s icing conditions. All depends on the moisture content and temperature and dewpoint. You can have cold and wet without ice and ice without cold. The question to me would be, can I get to a decent alternate or not? If not, you don’t go. — Jim Fisher North Alabama Cherokee 180
I’m planning a trip from Detroit area to Burlington Vermont if a few weeks in our club 182. I look at the weather each day and take a guess at what my go/no-go odds would be. With icing potential it gets pretty confusing with many options to consider! I’ve been looking at staying under the clouds VFR along low country and over lots of airports in case I need a quick out. Then I look (instead) at climbing through a holes in the broken or scattered layer and going on top. (if it looks like lots of openings for my descent at my destination) I have a few questions: 1. Since I don’t want to mess with freezing clouds is it usually best to go VFR? 2. If there is some precip along the route, and it’s reported either snow or rain, how do I know I’m not going to get some nasty freezing rain between stations? Is it best to no-go when there is some precip along the route with just above freezing surface temps? (even though there is no warm front in the area) 3. At what point does lower visibility raise the potential of ice. (I’m cruising under the deck at near freezing with no precip, but the visibility is 4 miles) Sorry for all the questions, but this is my first instrument rated winter. I have no experience in this stuff. … Aaron P.S. take today the 17th at 10z. Flying under the overcast would probably scare me off with the precip and some MVFR-IFR. But if the sky breaks up enough to depart through a hole, I could go on top with tops below 8000 and take one of the openings that show near my destination, with my out NW MA. (lots of fuel with long range tanks)
Fly Fishing Fisherman Wiki » Fly Fishing » Your comments on my flies
….There is nothing more fun than tying flies from a Pheasant skin.
"Wolfgang wrote Geez Ernie, I don’t know quite how to put this Wolfgang "She said, that ain’t the way to have fun, son"
Wolfie, Just wait until you are 70 before commenting. 
Ernie
Wolfie, you don’t have to be 70 to agree with Ernie! You can loose it by 48 too! — Padishar Creel "What do we live for if it is not to make life less difficult to each other." – George Eliot
irridescent body feathers,go to make up a Jack Gartside pattern, the Sparrow. A very versatile subsurface fly, can be nymph or minnow. Tom Littleton
Use the reddish colored ones for a rusty sparrow. Heavily weighted it is a great crawfish pattern. Fish it with the old Heave it and leave it technique. Everything on this fly moves with very little current. Big Dale – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –
Do you people know any pattern that requires pheasant feathers, other than the tail? Cheers, Peter.
I tie a nymph for lakes with the marabou type fluff from the rump feather and a dubbed body color to match the fluff with a gold rib. Looks like a really dark hares ear with a fluffy tail. Simple pattern to tie and is quite effective. Darin
This is simply not true. Mobile fibres such as marabou, polar bear hear, cat fur, and several others will simply not behave like this. If a fly tied with such fibres is placed in water and left immobile, the fibres tend to fill out to their full volume,and wave around with every nuance of the current. When pulled through the water, the fibres compress as a result of the ensuing water resistance, and many such flies assume a streamlined, torpedo like appearance in such circumstances.
Hmm in my experience Polar bear is very stiff and brittle. THe attractive thing about polar bear is that it is translucent. Tying streamers with polar bear creates a baitfish imitation that is translucent, much like many baitfish. I find it nothing like maribou, and I had to promise to leave the damn cats alone Ernie, There is a pattern up here in Maine, called the muddler hopper that uses those nicely patterned feathers from the back of the pheasant as a wing. essentially the pattern is a muddler headed hopper pattern, very effective and we fish them like dalhberg divers once they begin to sink. Brookies love ‘em Flyfish – countdown to the clave!
Hmm in my experience Polar bear is very stiff and brittle. THe attractive thing about polar bear is that it is translucent.
One word: Icelandic Sheep. OK, 2. Regards, Jeff
The blue rump fleathers can be used as eyes on baitfish imitations or wound as hackles on soft hackle flies. Tom ‘for the children of the world’ is a non-profit organization in the state of Washington that aids the child victims of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster. Visit our website at: http://www.forworldschildren.org – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – <snip Various short but passionate affairs with some materials, very often originally based on nothing more concrete than a desire to avoid wasting them, the plumulaceous base feathers from the common pheasant being a case in point, with rather disappointing results, have somewhat dampened my enthusiasm for experimentation in this regard. A hunting friend just gave me a complete pheasant skin to tie flies from. Apart from the tail feathers I use for various nymphs, I have not used pheasant for any flies. Do you people know any pattern that requires pheasant feathers, other than the tail? Cheers, Peter.
–
This is simply not true. Mobile fibres such as marabou, polar bear hear, cat fur, and several others will simply not behave like this. If a fly tied with such fibres is placed in water and left immobile, the fibres tend to fill out to their full volume,and wave around with every nuance of the current. When pulled through the water, the fibres compress as a result of the ensuing water resistance, and many such flies assume a streamlined, torpedo like appearance in such circumstances. When fished "sink and draw", that is to say, pulled, and then stopped, and then pulled again, such fibre bunches tend to "pulse", as they are alternately compressed, and then released from compression. Presumably it is the apparent indication of life imparted by such "pulsing" and other movement, which causes many fish to attack them. When fishing downstream ,on a tight line in heavy current for instance, such "pulsing" may be only slight, or even non existent, as the current is never weak enough to allow the fibres to fluff out to their full volume, and the flies retain a streamlined shape irrespective of manipulation by the rod and line. In heavy currents etc , other more robust, or springy, fibres must be used to achieve such effects. The flies must be tied to suit the circumstances. Failure to appreciate this quite simple fact, will result in less fish being caught Some flies may have a particular shape or appearance in air, but it is not sensible to assume that they will retain such an appearance in water, which is quite obviously a completely different medium. Their BEHAVIOUR, or FUNCTION, if you prefer, may also be completely different.This is not entirely dependent on the materials used in their construction, but also the way in which they are used, and under what circumstances. Wetting a fly and then looking at it in air is not a viable test, it must be completely immersed in water, and its various properties tested, if one wishes to know how it will behave under similar circumstances. Some things may be inferred from experience, or previous knowledge of certain fibres, without these tests, but only such tests are proof positive. You may check this quite easily, it is not necessary to take my word for it, just fill a sink with water and pull a fly tied like this through it. Then pull some others through as well, you will notice massive differences in their respective behaviour immediately. Exactly the same applies for soft hackled wet flies, which is why the patterns mentioned, when tied in this specific way, are not suitable for upstream fishing, or at least not as suitable as others. Streamlined nymphal shapes, with a translucent, waving or "wriggling" body effect, as you put it, will only be apparent when the flies are pulled through the water, or at least held in the current, which is basically the same thing. Compressive fibre streamlining occurs as a direct result of water resistance. Without this they will not compress. Water resistance forces the fibres backwards, veiling the body, and this will then be an excellent imitation of an active swimming nymph. Or a fish for instance, in the case of some lures etc. This will only occur if the fly is pulled through the water, ( retrieved), or fished downstream on a tight line. In ALL OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES the fly will not assume such an appearance. There are many variables here, and one may pursue such studies into realms of detail far beyond the scope or interest of most anglers. Various fibres behave in various ways, and there are a considerable number of excellent and valid reasons why most of these flies are tied with specific feathers. While it may be true that flies tied with somewhat less attention to detail, and with substitute feathers, still catch fish, it is my experience, and that of many others, that they are nowhere near as effective as the original patterns tied correctly. If as you say you have noticed no difference, then that forces me to a number of conclusions. The first one is, if it does not matter as you say, then why are you arguing so vehemently against it? The second one is, as I know this to be an easily demonstrable fact, I am bound to assume that you have not tried it, as otherwise you could not possibly have a differing opinion. This subject is simply not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of known fact. The third one is, as I already stated, the originals, tied ( and fished! ),correctly, catch more fish. In order to know this you must have either tried it, or at least have it on hearsay that this is so. As you have obviously not tried the originals, or even apparently heard any reliable evidence to support this idea, you are in no position to argue as to its veracity. Fourthly, ease of tying is not my main criterion when tying flies, in fact it is not usually even a criterion at all. As an argument in favour of using less suitable materials, it is pure nonsense. If you can not tie flies using these materials, either due to a lack of manipulatory skill, or simply because you are unable to obtain them, then that is most unfortunate for you, but it is not a valid reason for arguing against others doing so. My flies are tied purely to catch fish, and they do so, with remarkable regularity and consistency. I do not really give a tinker
Fly Fishing Fisherman Wiki » Fly Fishing Flies » trout feast
Reality Sucks I say she’s seeking guidance from an experienced fly fisher/computer scientist, and deserves your best efforts. Dave
Reality Sucks I say she’s seeking guidance from an experienced fly fisher/computer scientist, and deserves your best efforts. Dave
Yep, that’s my take, too, although I think the help she needs in more in the flyfishing area than the computer area. — something bogus to avoid spam)
There’s a difference. I believe rw. I don’t believe that 9 lb brookies exist. Well maybe in Labrador.
Funny thing you should mention that Mike. Last Sunday’s Milwaukee Journal Sentinel had a short article on the new Wisconsin state record brook trout. I don’t recall exactly what it weighed but I believe it was just over ten pounds. It was caught out of Lake Michigan, I believe, by a guy who had been fishing the big water for several years. It was his first legal brookie!! By the way, the old record, set some time in the forties was over nine pounds and came out of the Prairie river up in the north central part of the state.
Hey Wulff, I don’t get it. I thought you moved to Idaho to get away from it all. You’re telling us that there is a stocked pond 15 minutes from your cabin?
A lot of the high mountain lakes in Idaho and Montana, lakes that take four-five hour hikes to get to, in Idaho are chocked full of twelve inch stockers. They dump the fish in by airplane. Share what you know. Learn what you don’t.
Dear All, I’ve been fishing for quite some time, tho i’d never tried fly fishing. Well, on Monday I turned 29, and a few friends got together and got me a started kit for fly-fishng. I watched the video that came with the kit (hey – you have to start somewhere…) and have a few questions. 1. Backing – how much & why bother? I can’t figure out what this stuff is for – I have a forward tapered line, 30 yrds long. How much backing do I use? 2. What is the difference between the tippet and the leader? 3. Can anyone suggest a good book or website for help on starting out. I realize I am going to have to take lessons one way or another, but if I could get myself started, I really like to have a go. I live about a five minute walk from a river, so I figure I try this out fairly easily. I don’t expect to catch much, but this looks like a whole lot of fun. 4. Can anyone suggest any good beginner rivers near Ottawa, Ontario and some flies to go with the river? I wouldn’t mind learning how to catch trout or bass (the rod is 6/7 weight)… is the former possible near Ottawa? 5. Any suggestions for a fly fishing store in Ottawa? I use the LeBaron’s & the Cdn Tire for most of my fishing stuff, but I am not sure if they will be adequate for fly-fishing. thanks for any advice you can give… I am really looking forward to trying this out! Alastair Mullin
You will receive some very useful information here on many of these question and I will attempt to start: Dear All, I’ve been fishing for quite some time, tho i’d never tried fly fishing. Well, on Monday I turned 29, and a few friends got together and got me a started kit for fly-fishng. I watched the video that came with the kit (hey – you have to start somewhere…) and have a few questions. 1. Backing – how much & why bother? I can’t figure out what this stuff is for – I have a forward tapered line, 30 yrds long. How much backing do I use?
The backing has two purposes 1) add diameter to the spool(1:1 retrieve is preety slow) and to add length when you get into the big fish. You should use enough backing so that with the backing and the fly line, you are with 1/8th to 1/4 of and inch of filling the spool. 2. What is the difference between the tippet and the leader? 3. Can anyone suggest a good book or website for help on starting out. I realize I am going to have to take lessons one way or another, but if I could get myself started, I really like to have a go. I live about a five minute walk from a river, so I figure I try this out fairly easily. I don’t expect to catch much, but this looks like a whole lot of fun.
Email me and I will send you a very long list of fly fishing sites. One I frequent is http://www.flyanglersonline.com/ 4. Can anyone suggest any good beginner rivers near Ottawa, Ontario and some flies to go with the river? I wouldn’t mind learning how to catch trout or bass (the rod is 6/7 weight)… is the former possible near Ottawa?
The Ottawa river and Rideau rivers both hold bass and other warm water species and there are spots on the Ottawa that hold trout. 5. Any suggestions for a fly fishing store in Ottawa? I use the LeBaron’s & the Cdn Tire for most of my fishing stuff, but I am not sure if they will be adequate for fly-fishing.
fart .. oops .. extinguished gentleman that runs the place is very knowledgable and has course covering all aspect of fly fishing, from insect life cycles to tying flies. thanks for any advice you can give… I am really looking forward to trying this out! Alastair Mullin
Chris Richer
Choose one: 1. Lying 2. Stupid 3. Gay 4. Computer Scientist <g
5. Married with two kids. — something bogus to avoid spam)
5. Married with two kids.
Me too. Wonder why that didn’t occur to me? As Roseann Rosannadanna said, "never mind." Your story reminded me of a greeting card I once found. On the front was a photo of an extraordinarily beautiful girl – perfect skin, perfect hair, perfect makeup, nice figure, etc. On the inside it simply said, "You’re old enough to be her father. Happy Birthday." Nothing like an occasional reality check. Joe F.
—–BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE—– While in non-compliance with local decency ordinances the world over, Whew ! And did I tell you about the time I caught a 9 lb brookie on a #26 parachute adams.
There’s a difference. I believe rw. I don’t believe that 9 lb brookies exist. Well maybe in Labrador. I would believe the fly. An unginked Parachute Adams is pretty durned miraculous, although I’ve never bought one smaller than #18 —–BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE—– Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBN3vWqMkBcsCVVLK5AQEphAP+NRC/76qrfjaiOP7l/mNUTqEEjMVHMGnx sGTYeseyqkT2C0XEeqXtB63/2CCfWmgr9/Yj/FhMTzweH/yjWDctRZwjUDukPee9 x2ZsHfYFI3c4f6QFz0F5+j2LUIqmRrfi3+M3CXkXOkebayhONMCCqNi+rZttLlns Y1Qc50XQptg= =yx4a —–END PGP SIGNATURE—– Mike S. Medintz, B.S. | http://www.grapevine.net/~medintz "Living with a dog is easy-like living with an idealist is easy." -H.L. Mencken
Ken Fortenberry: <<Whew ! And did I tell you about the time I caught a 9 lb brookie on a #26 parachute adams. Was that the one in Panama, Ken? I think I remember it! Dave LaCourse
When I got home today from Challis there was a message from her on my machine. She wants to go fishing. I’m old enough to be this girl’s father, so I’m not hitting on her,
in which case, i say to you in the depth of seriousness, you need psychological help. i have observed your posts for several months, and i am certain that the words we see above are a sham, pure drivel, meant to decieve the foolish amongst us. go for it, man. hell, if you saw jo lacourse, you would realize that *nothing* is impossible! wayno.
[snipped] go for it, man. hell, if you saw jo lacourse, you would realize that *nothing* is impossible!
Boy, ain’t that the truth ;^) /daytripper (still amazed)
While the Fish & Game guy was cleaning my fish this drop-dead gorgeous babe walks up to me. She’s wearing waders and has a big Malemute dog. She’s a dead ringer for Janine Turner, who played Maggie in the TV show Northern Exposure. She says, "Are you the computer scientist?" Jesus H. Christ, what’s going on here?!
I don’t know what’s going on; but if beautiful women are seeking out computer scientists, there may be hope for us engineers, too. I’m not hitting on her.
Choose one: 1. Lying 2. Stupid 3. Gay 4. Computer Scientist <g Joe F. btw: notice how everyone ignored the fishing part of that story?
Ken Fortenberry: <<Whew ! And did I tell you about the time I caught a 9 lb brookie on a #26 parachute adams. Was that the one in Panama, Ken? I think I remember it!
Why yes, yes it was. I’m surprised you remember anything about that trip, if it wasn’t for those silly bottles I’d have never got you back into the jungle to witness my brookie extravaganza. — Ken Fortenberry
When I got home today from Challis there was a message from her on my machine. She wants to go fishing. I’m old enough to be this girl’s father, so I’m not hitting on her, in which case, i say to you in the depth of seriousness, you need psychological help. i have observed your posts for several months, and i am certain that the words we see above are a sham, pure drivel, meant to decieve the foolish amongst us.
Well, Wayno, I’ll admit that I’m conflicted about it. — something bogus to avoid spam)
I pigged out on trout today. I’m so full I could hardly get myself to the computer. My dog pigged out on trout, too. Anyone want to make something of it. Seriously, these were stocker rainbows in a pond where they won’t survive the winter. If I don’t kill them Old Man Frost or the bait fishermen will. I can get my limit of 12" fish there any time I want, and it’s only 15 minutes from my cabin, along a beautiful dirt road where I regularly see elk and sandhill cranes. When I get blanked on real (i.e., wild) fish I go there. While I was landing a fish a hungry-looking osprey was circling my float tube. If that sucker can’t catch his own fish in this spot I have no sympathy for him. Life is good. — something bogus to avoid spam)
Hey Wulff, I don’t get it. I thought you moved to Idaho to get away from it all. You’re telling us that there is a stocked pond 15 minutes from your cabin? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Seriously, these were stocker rainbows in a pond where they won’t survive the winter. If I don’t kill them Old Man Frost or the bait fishermen will. I can get my limit of 12" fish there any time I want, and it’s only 15 minutes from my cabin, along a beautiful dirt road where I regularly see elk and sandhill cranes. When I get blanked on real (i.e., wild) fish I go there.
Hey Wulff, I don’t get it. I thought you moved to Idaho to get away from it all. You’re telling us that there is a stocked pond 15 minutes from your cabin?
More than one. The Sawtooth Hatchery is just a couple of miles down the road. It’s main purpose is to keep the steelhead and salmon going, but they also stock some lakes and the Main Fork of the Salmon heavily to keep the tourists happy. There’s plenty of fishing for wild trout here, but that’s nearly all C&R and I like to eat fish sometimes. — something bogus to avoid spam)
rw, I experienced the stocking program at Stanlee Idaho while vacationing there. I had been fishing without much success when some ladies returned with several large trout that were obviously from a hatchery and started telling me it was easy to catch trout. In fact if I would go to this small stream by the road I could practically catch them by hand. The fishing was so easy they couldn’t understand why I didn’t have a lot of fish and I wouldn’t need the waders or any thing because I could just jump across the stream. Needless to say I didn’t try to tell any fishing stories that day. Ernie Harrison Like to make fly-fishing stuff? See: http://users.ccnet.com/~emh/ – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The Sawtooth Hatchery is just a couple of miles down the road. It’s main purpose is to keep the steelhead and salmon going, but they also stock some lakes and the Main Fork of the Salmon heavily to keep the tourists happy.
rw, I experienced the stocking program at Stanlee Idaho while vacationing there. I had been fishing without much success when some ladies returned with several large trout that were obviously from a hatchery and started telling me it was easy to catch trout. In fact if I would go to this small stream by the road I could practically catch them by hand. The fishing was so easy they couldn’t understand why I didn’t have a lot of fish and I wouldn’t need the waders or any thing because I could just jump across the stream. Needless to say I didn’t try to tell any fishing stories that day.
It’s just amazing how heavily they stock some of these places. I had to go to Challis today, about 60 miles away, and on the way back I stopped at Squaw Creek Pond. This is about a 1/2 acre holding pond for young steelhead. It has literally thousands of fish in it. I must have caught 40 or 50 fish in an hour and a half, keeping six that were hooked so badly I thought they wouldn’t make it. This may not be the most aesthetic fishing experience in the world, but I like knowing I can catch my dinner whenever I feel like it, courtesy of Idaho Fish & Game. A couple of weeks ago I was fishing one of these stocked ponds — a real pretty one. As I was walking out of the water with my standard six fish an Idaho Fish & Game guy introduced himself. As I was fumbling around in my vest for my license he just asked me if he could clean my fish! He wanted the stomachs to find out what they were eating. While the Fish & Game guy was cleaning my fish this drop-dead gorgeous babe walks up to me. She’s wearing waders and has a big Malemute dog. She’s a dead ringer for Janine Turner, who played Maggie in the TV show Northern Exposure. She says, "Are you the computer scientist?" Jesus H. Christ, what’s going on here?! It turns out the proprietor of the local fly shop, whom I know well, told her I was up there. Thanks, Larry! So we chat for awhile, I look over her fly boxes, pretending to be expert (these fish will hit about anything), and then give her a fly that I know for sure is a super killer in this pond. My fish are finally cleaned (the guy took forever), so I collect the fish, give her my phone number, and split. When I got home today from Challis there was a message from her on my machine. She wants to go fishing. I’m old enough to be this girl’s father, so I’m not hitting on her, but I love being around beautiful women. I’m telling you guys, this place is sportsman friendly. — something bogus to avoid spam)
<snip … this drop-dead gorgeous babe walks up to me. … … so I’m not hitting on her, but I love being around beautiful women. <rest of tall tale snipped
Whew ! And did I tell you about the time I caught a 9 lb brookie on a #26 parachute adams. — Ken Fortenberry
<snip … this drop-dead gorgeous babe walks up to me. … … so I’m not hitting on her, but I love being around beautiful women. <rest of tall tale snipped Whew ! And did I tell you about the time I caught a 9 lb brookie on a #26 parachute adams.
This ain’t no fish tale, Ken. — something bogus to avoid spam)
This ain’t no fish tale, Ken.
I believed every single word til I got to the "I’m not hittin’ on her" part. — Ken Fortenberry
This ain’t no fish tale, Ken. I believed every single word til I got to the "I’m not hittin’ on her" part.
Yeah, that is a little tough to swallow. Maybe I’ll try a very delicate downstream approach, with a 14′ 7x leader. — something bogus to avoid spam)
Fly Fishing Fisherman Wiki » Flyfishing » Bow River??
I was just wondering if there is anyone here that fishes on the Bow river in calgary. Thanx.
Not yet but will do so this June. It isn’t a great time to go due to spring run-off but the company’s sales conference is there and they are paying. You might check out the Western Canada regional board on Virtual Flyshop (http://www.flyshop.com) which has a number of Alberta guides as active members including Jim McLennan who is one of the better known guides. I have gotten some really good recommendations as to flies, guides, and other rivers in the region to try. -John
I was just wondering if there is anyone here that fishes on the Bow river in calgary. Thanx.
I have done (7) nine day trips on the Bow. Three floats from Calgary to Carseland dam per trip. Ask away. Ted Bobetsky (http://www.flyfishing-the-salt.com)
I’d recommend Jim Powlesland, except that you’d have to put up with him ‘air’ shooting every living animal on the truck ride to the river. — TimW, Halfordian Golfer "A Cash Flow Runs Through It…" "Guilt replaced the creel…"
Fly Fishing Fisherman Wiki » Fly Fishing Flies » All these billions of flycasts.
Today there are almost as many different type of fly-casts as there are flyfishermans. Does it exist a generel Guide or dictionary which describes all these many casts? Maybe there are some nice sites about this? Thanks Gustav Hellstrom, Sweden
There is really only one basic cast and everything is built of that. The double haul, for example, is an extension of the traditional backcast, as is Lefty’s back cast etc. The roll cast is a little different, but the rod tip physics are the same. The key is to get the basic cast right. After that, Lefty Kreh has a very good book entitled "Longer Fly Casting"
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Today there are almost as many different type of fly-casts as there are flyfishermans. Does it exist a generel Guide or dictionary which describes all these many casts? Maybe there are some nice sites about this? Thanks Gustav Hellstrom, Sweden
Hellstroem) writes: Today there are almost as many different type of fly-casts as there are flyfishermans. Does it exist a generel Guide or dictionary which describes all these many casts? Maybe there are some nice sites about this?
Hi Gustav, Probably the best book I’ve seen describing and analyzing lots of different fly casts is Joan Wulff’s book "Fly Casting Techniques". she is very analytical in her approach and gives clear concise instructions. The old Kelson Book "Salmon Flies" (originally published in 1895 and reprinted a lot), although primarily recognized because of its fly tying instructions, has some nice info on various casts with a two handed rod along with illustrations of the techniques. Hope this helps, Dan Dan Gracia Orvis West Coast Fly Fishing Schools Mt. Shasta Fly Fishing Schools http://www.thegrid.net/flyfish
Fly Fishing Fisherman Wiki » Fly Fishing » Striper fishing in Maine.
Any thoughts on Striper fishing in the Scarborough, Cape Elizabeth region? Any insight would be appreciated.
might want to go take a look at Bob Skehan’s Maine Fly Fishing page or get in
Fly Fishing Fisherman Wiki » Fly Fishing » Fishing at Lake Crowley
I am going fly fishing in the Sierras Oct. 1. Has anyone been to Lake Crowley or Lake Sotcher recently. If so can you let me know what you
Just got back on the 29th and grasshoppers are the hot ticket!!! I am going back Oct 8th for 6 more days. K.S. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I am going fly fishing in the Sierras Oct. 1. Has anyone been to Lake Crowley or Lake Sotcher recently. If so can you let me know what you
Just got back on the 29th and grasshoppers are the hot ticket!!! I am going back Oct 8th for 6 more days. K.S.
RE: grasshoppers, were you fishing them in the lake or up at the mouth of the Owens where it drops into the lake? FAS – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I am going fly fishing in the Sierras Oct. 1. Has anyone been to Lake Crowley or Lake Sotcher recently. If so can you let me know what you
Fly Fishing Fisherman Wiki » Flyfishing » How to Decide Where Legal to Fish?
How do you decide where to fish? (I’m talking about stream flyfishing). It is mainly by checking maps…word of mouth…roaming around until somebody yells at you? Or is public land open to those with a license?
Jeff, If it’s fenced, or obviously private property, get permission. It’s a common courtesy that more sportsmen could afford to practice. Often, the owners are so overwhelmed that a member of ‘the public’ is courteous enough to ask permission that they deed the land to you and volunteer to build a house for you at the water’s edge. ‘Course, other times, they just start shooting! :^) Charley
A couple of friends are helping me into this sport, but I have a question about stream access I’m still a bit uncomfortable with…Some people seem to be very bold about entering a new stream, and some stick to obviously marked recreation areas. How do you decide where to fish? (I’m talking about stream flyfishing). It is mainly by checking maps…word of mouth…roaming around until somebody yells at you? Or is public land open to those with a license?
How do you decide where to fish? (I’m talking about stream flyfishing). It is mainly by checking maps…word of mouth…roaming around until somebody yells at you? Or is public land open to those with a license?
Well-organised states (i.e. not all) print basic legal information about access in the booklet distributed free with fishing licences. — | Donald Phillipson, 4180 Boundary Road, Carlsbad Springs, | | Ontario, Canada, K0A 1K0, tel. 613 822 0734 |
How do you decide where to fish? (I’m talking about stream flyfishing). It is mainly by checking maps…word of mouth…roaming around until somebody yells at you? Or is public land open to those with a license?
This is really easy Jeff. The more signs there are threatening castration for trespassing, the better and more exciting the fishing will be. Tim Walker
That attitude Tim is what causes property owners to POST property. Mike